- »* "^O 






,*''?^-°/'^ ^V'^^v V'''^'V'' %*•••'• 

'^.i^v^^o /\v;^.\ c,o^^^>o y.^^s 



y*"*. 

V ^ 



\r * ^^ "«> • ©IIS 










• o.^^ "^^ '^m.' ^^ ^^ Ww^* ,/ % •©lis* 






..* . 









^v 









A-i^ 



, N 6 






' • o. 






.^^ 







^^-n^ -^ 



• • 






• • 



story of the Nations 

A Series of Historical Studies intended to present in 
graphic narratives the stories of the different 
nations that have attained prominence in history. 



In the story form the current of each national 
life is distinctly indicated, and its picturesque and 
noteworthy periods and episodes are presented for 
the reader in their philosophical relations to each 
other as well as to universal history. 



12°, Illustrated, cloth, each . . $1.50 
Half Leather, each . . . $1.75 

No. 62 and following Nos. net $1.35 

Each . . . (By mail) $1.50 

Half leather, gilt top, each, . net $1.60 

(By mail) $1.75 



FOR FULL LIST SEE END OF THIS VOLUME. 



THE COMING OF PARLIAMENT 



r^ . 




P^i-oto\ [Emery Walker, 

KING HENRY VII. (1457-1509). 

From the effigy by Torregiano on the monuvietit i7t 
tVestminster Abbey. 



THE STORY OF THE NATIONS 



THE COMING OF 
PARLIAMENT 

ENGLAND FROM 1350 TO 1660 



BY 
L. CECIL JANE 

EDITOR OF BEDe's "ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY" 



NEW YORK 

G. p. PUTNAM'S SONS 

LONDON : T. FISHER UNWIN 
1905 






^r-tm* 



6 E g ^/~o 



• G 9 



Ube Tkniclietbocher prega, mew igorft 



PREFACE 



The general scheme of this volume is indicated by- 
its title. It deals more especially with the develop- 
ment of the constitution within the three centuries 
with which it is concerned, and it is an attempt to 
trace the steps by which Parliament attained to a 
permanently important share in the government of 
England. On the other hand, while special stress 
is laid upon this theme, other sides of the national 
life have not been ignored. Some allusion to them, 
indeed, is necessary that the progress of Parliament 
may be illustrated and understood. I have also 
included an outline of the general history of the 
period that the reader's memory may be refreshed 
as to the principal events. 

I wish to thank those who have assisted me with 
their help and advice. And I owe a special debt 
of gratitude to the lady who so generously gave 
her time to the work of compiling the index. 



Oxford, 

November^ 1904. 



L. CECIL JANE. 



CONTENTS 



Introduction ..... 

Character of the period — The changes eftected- 
insularity — Steps in the progress. 



PAGE 

1-6 



-Liberty and 



II. 



England in 1350 



7-27 



Accession of Edward III. — War with Scotland — Causes of 
the Hundred Years' War — Pseudo-chivalry — Guienne — 
Flanders — Distinctive character of the war — Value of archers 
— The command of the sea — Sluys — Cregy — The Black 
Death. 



III. 

The Fall of the Feudal Monarchy (1350- 

1399) 28-71 

Renewal of the war — Poitiers — Treaty of Bretigni — Its 
importance — Navarette — Loss of Aquitaine — Internal affairs 
— The "Good Parliament " — Reign of Richard II.— 
Gloucester — The Lords Appellant — Deposition of Richard 
— Rise of Parliament — Settlement of its constitution — The 
control of taxation — Impeachment — ^John of Gaunt — Decline 



X CONTENTS 

PAGE 

of the Baronage — The navy — Appanages — The Church — 
Wycliff — The Peasants' Revolt — Fall of feudalism — The 
problems of the Lancastrians. 



IV. 
The Constitutional Experiment (1399-1461) . 72-99 

Position of Henry IV. — Risings against him — Owen 
Glendower — The Percies — Foreign policy — Henry V.'s 
French War — Agincourt — Treaty of Troyes — -Regency of 
Bedford — His difficulties — Siege of Orleans— Loss of J^ ranee 
— Disorder in England — The Wars of the Roses — Accession 
of Edward IV. — The Lancastrian Monarchy — Failure of the 
constitutional government — Extinction of the Baronage — 
Decline of the Church — Social conditions. 

V. 

The House of York (1461-1485) . . . 100-123 

Edward IV. — Warwick — Their quarrel — Restoration ot 
Henry VI. — Barnet and Tewkesbury — Treaty of Pecquigny 
— Death of Clarence — Edward V. —Richard III. — Buck- 
ingham's rebellion — Battle of Bosworth — Character of 
Richard — Nature of the Yorkist Monarchy — The Nobles — 
The Church — Commerce — Introduction of printing — Progress 
of England. 

VI. 
The Tudor Monarchy (1485-1529) . 124-182 

Accession of Henry VII. — The Yorkists — Ireland and 
Burgundy — Lambert Simnel — Perkin Warbeck — The 
Cornish rising — Government of Henry — Poynings' Laws — 
State of Europe — Brittany — Treaty of Etaples — The 
hitercursus Magnus — Matrimonial projects — Flenry VIII. 
— Cardinal Wolsey — War with France — Flodden — Francis I. 
and Charles V. — The question of a divorce — Fall of Wolsey 
— The Tudor Monarchy— Revival of Learning — The Re- 
formation — The middle class — The discoveries — Naval 
progress — Local government. 



CONTENTS xi 

VII. 

PAGE 

The Reformation (15 29-1 558) . . . 183-213 

England after the fall of Wolsey — Thomas Cromwell — The 
Reformation Parliament — Dissolution of the Monasteries — 
Catholic opposition — The Six Articles— Death and character 
of Henry — ^Regency of Somerset — Social distress — Govern- 
ment of Warwick — Accession of Mary — The Spanish 
marriage — Reunion with Rome — The Marian persecution — 
Cranmer — Character of Mary — The English Reformation — 
Its social and economic effects — The Church — Internal 
conditions. 

VIII. 
The Elizabethan Settlement (i 558-1 587) . 214-245 

Difficulties of Elizabeth — William Cecil — Mary, Queen of 
Scots — Catholic plots — Foreign policy — The Jesuits — 
Throgmorton — Babington — Execution of Mary — Causes of 
Elizabeth's temporising policy — Her settlement of the 
Church — Persecution of the Catholics — The Elizabethan 
sailors — Drake — Hawkins — Literature of the period — 
Shakespeare — S pense r — Their significance . 

IX. 

The Struggle with Spain (i 587-1603) . . 246-282 

Effect of Mary's death — The Armada — Advantages of the 
English — Defeat of the Armada — Its results — The- later 
policy of Elizabeth — Essex — Character of Elizabeth — Pier 
courtships — Persecution of the Puritans — Position of Parlia- 
ment — Material prosperity — The Poor Law — Local govern- 
ment — Attempts at colonisation — Raleigh and Virginia — The 
results of Elizabeth's reign — Growth of liberty. 

X. 

The Theory of Divine Right (i 603-1 640) . 283-323 

James I. and his policy — The Church — The favourites— 
Foreign affairs — Relations with Parliament — The judges — 



Xll CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Revival of impeachment — Character of Charles I. — His 
quarrels with Parliament — The Petition of Right — Assassi- 
nation of Buckingham — Laud — Wentworth — The Star 
Chamber — Personal government — Ship money — Strafford in 
Ireland — The Scottish War — The Short Parliament — Divine 
right — The Church difficulty — Colonisation of America — 
The decline of England. 

XI. 

The Great Rebellion (1640-1649) . . 324-354 

Meeting of the Long Parliament — Execution of Strafford — 
Reforms of the Commons — Their fear of Charles — The Grand 
Remonstrance — The Five Members — Outbreak of civil war 
— Royalist victories — Marston Moor — The New Model 
Army and the Self-denying Ordinance — Naseby — Triumph 
of the Army — Trial and death of Charles — Its causes and 
justification — Objects of the Great Rebellion — The two 
parties — Causes of the victory of Parliament — Effects of the 
war — State of England. 

XII. 

The Rule of Oliver Cromwell (1649-1660) 355-385 

Disorder in England — State of Ireland — The massacre of 
Drogheda— State of Scotland — Dunbar and Worcester — 
Government by the Rump — Supremacy of Cromwell — His 
Parliament — His ecclesiastical policy — The Dutch War — 
France and Spain — Conquest of Jamaica — Character of 
Cromwell — Collapse of his system — The Restoration — 
Results of the Great Rebellion — The Monarchy— Parliament 
— Hatred for a standing army— The Church — The Royalist 
reaction — Conclusion. 

Chronological Table 386 



Index 



399 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 



KING HENRY VII. .... Frontispiece 

From the effigy by Torregiano on the monument in Westminster Abbey. 

PACK 

KING EDWARD III. . . . . 

From, his monument in Westminster Abbey. 



9 



NEW COLLEGE, OXFORD . . . -19 

From a seventeenth-century print. 

TRAVELLING BY SEA IN THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY . 23 
From the MS. Harl., 13 19 

BALLIOL COLLEGE, OXFORD . . . -33 

From a seventeenth-century print. 

WILLIAM OF WYKEHAM . . • -41 

■ From a portrait by J. Faber, in the Hall of New College, Oxford. 

MONUMENT OF JOHN, DUKE OF LANCASTER, AND OF 

HIS WIFE CONSTANCE, IN OLD ST. PAUL's . 5 1 

Dugdale. 

JOHN WYCLIFF . . . . . -63 

From a portrait attributed to Antonio Moro, now an heirloom in the 
Rectory of Wyclif-on-Tees. 

KING HENRY IV. . . • • -74 

From his Tomb. 

KING HENRY VI. . . . • • ^3 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

Xlll 



xiv LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

RICHARD NEVILLE, EARL OF WARWICK . '91 

From his momiinent in St. Mary's, Warwick. 

KING EDWARD IV. . . . . . I03 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

KING RICHARD III. . . . . . I09 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

LOUIS XL, KING OF FRANCE . . . • H? 

From a drawing in the British Museum. 

ELIZABETH OF YORK, QUEEN-CONSORT OF HENRY VII. 121 

From the effigy by Torregiano on the monument in Westminster Abbey. 

PERKIN WARBECK . . . . -131 

From a drawing by a French or Flemish artist of the sixteenth-century, 
preserved at Arras, France. 

MARGARET TUDOR, QUEEN-CONSORT OF SCOTLAND . 1 39 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

THE FAMILY OF HENRY VIII. . . . . I49 

From a painting in the Queen's^ Audience Chamber, Hampton Court. 

CARDINAL WOLSEY . . . . • ^SS 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

ANNE BOLEYN . . . . . • 163 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

THE EMPEROR CHARLES V. . . . . 167 

From an engraving after Sir Anthony Van Dyke. 

SIR THOMAS MORE . . . • 173 

From an old engraving after the enamel of Holbein. 

THE "GREAT HARRY " . . . • 179 

From a drawing by J. Allen, after Holbein's picture. 

THOMAS CROMWELL, EARL OF ESSEX . . • 185 

By Holbein, probable date about 1537. Picture is now at 
Tyttenhanger Park, and is reproduced by permission of the 
Countess of Caledon and Messrs. Goupil. 

THOMAS CRANMER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY . igi 

From an old engraving after the portrait at Lambeth Palace. 

EDWARD SEYMOUR, DUKE OF SOMERSET . -197 

From a painting now in the possession of Sir E. Verney, Baii., at 
Rhianva. 



LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS XV 



PAGE 

CARDINAL POLE ..... 203 

After the picture by Titian, now in the possession of Lord 
Arundel of Wardour. By permission of the owner and 
Messrs. Cassell cS; Co. 

CHRIST CHURCH, OXFORD .... 209 

From a seventeenth-century print. 

MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS . . . ,217 

After a picture attributed to Franfois Clouet (Janet) in the National 
Portrait Gallery. 

SIR FRANCIS DRAKE . . . . .229 

From an etching by Verttie. 

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE . . . -233 

From the title-page of the First Folio of 1623. 

EDMUND SPENSER . . . . . 237 

Frotn an engraving by W. B. Scott, 1839. 

BEN JONSON ...... 243 

From the painting by Gerard Honthorst. 

PHILIP II. KING OF SPAIN . . . . 247 

From the painting by Alonso Sanchez Coello in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

WILLIAM CECIL, LORD BURLEIGH . . -257 

From a painting by Marc Gheeraedis (?) in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

QUEEN ELIZABETH . . ... .263 

From an engraving by William Rogers. 

SIR THOMAS GRESHAM . . . . .269 

From, the painting by Sir Antonio More tn the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

SIR WALTER RALEIGH . . . . -275 

From Vertue's engraving of a contemporary picture at Knole: 

KING JAMES I. . . . . .285 

Fro7n a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 

ARABELLA STUART . . . . . 29I 

From an engraving by George Humble. 

SIR FRANCIS BACON ..... 299 

From the painting by Paul Van Somer in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 



Xvi LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS 

PAGE 

GEORGE VILLIERS, DUKE OF BUCKINGHAM, AND HIS 

FAMILY . . . . . . 307 

From the painting by Gerard Honthorst in the National Portrait 
Gallery. 

SIR EDWARD COKE . . . . -SI? 

From the painting by Cornelius Jausen van Cenlen in the National 
Portrait Gallery. 

THOMAS WENTWORTH, EARL OF STRAFFORD . . 325 

Afier Sir Anthony Van Dyke. 

JOHN PYM ...... 333 

Frotn a tniniature by Cooper. 

JOHN HAMPDEN ..... 343 

From Nnqenfs "Life of Hampden." 

WILLIAM LAUD, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY . . 349 

Afier the painting by Sir Anthony Van Dyke at Lambeth Palace. 

iNiGO Jones's banqueting hall, Whitehall . 357 

From a print in the Grace Collection. 
HAMPTON COURT . . . . . 363 

OLIVER CROMWELL . . . . -371 

From the portrait by Samuel Cooper at Sidney Sussex College, 
Cambridge. 

ROBERT BLAKE . . . . • 381 

From an old print. 



MAP OF ENGLAND. Facing page i 

From Camden s " Britannia ' {tid. 1695). 




This Map « from the 1695 (English) edition of Camden's " Bi 



across the coonln, [,„„ London to Chester was the successor of Watlini. Street ik'"M the means "t con.m.i mcatiun in ll e se;entcentli ccntnry. The highroads of England followed to a great extent tlie general lines of the old Koman ways. Thus the 
The Foss Way from Bath to Lincoln was also preserved in a later highroad wVP ■"""* toad from London to 1, nco n-and in parts beyon.l-may ho roughly identilled w.lh Erniing Street, and the Hath road followed the course of the Roman road from M, 

' "'" in oih,, parts of the country tin. later roadhuilders were mnch indebted to the Romans, Mch changes as were made were usually inleiided to avoid some engineering difficulty 



engineering difficulty. 




j-itannia," and illustrates 
atling Street, the north rj, 
highroad, while in othei' 



THE COMING OF PARLIAMENT 



INTRODUCTION 



While it is an obvious truism' to say that all 
historical periods are marked by change, it is also 
true that there are essentially transitional epochs ; 
and, in the history of England, such a transitional 
epoch is found in the three centuries which elapsed 
between the Black Death and the Restoration. No 
date, within these limits, can be confidently assigned 
as the starting-point of a new system, but in 1660 
the whole condition of England was quite different 
from that in 1350. And this gradual evolution of 
the new, this lack of rapid or revolutionary change, is 
the essence of transition — a word which implies the 
slow passing of an old order. 

A brief comparison of the kingdom of Edward III. 
with that of Charles II. is sufficient to indicate the 
progress which was accomplished in those three 
hundred years. The first-named sovereign ruled a 

2 ^ 



2 INTRODUCTION 

semi-continental state, owning lands on both sides of 
the Channel ; he ruled a large part of Southern 
France, but he did not rule Scotland, which was still 
the seat of an independent, and, indeed, a hostile, 
kingdom. The government of England was still 
largely feudal, though modified by the addition of 
Parliament, which body was still in its infancy and 
of which the permanency was but doubtful. And 
the power of the monarch was still very great ; he 
was still the supreme and unquestioned head of the 
executive. In addition to these territorial interests, 
England was bound to the Continent by the stronger 
tie of religion ; her Church was but part of that great 
Christian body over which the Pope presided. And 
the chief wealth of the country lay in agriculture ; 
the centres of population lay in the south, and the 
principal exports were raw materials. 

In 1660 all this has been changed. The English 
possessions on the Continent have been finally lost, 
and though Charles inherits the title of King of 
France, the wildest visionaries do not propose to 
attempt to enforce a claim which has long since 
become obsolete. The map of Europe has been 
redrawn, and, while England's rivalry is mainly with 
the Dutch, the King of France is occupied with a 
struggle against the house of Austria. On the other 
hand, Charles rules over Scotland as well as Eng- 
land^ and a new Empire is arising across the seas in 
lands of which the very existence was unknown to 
Edward III. Feudalism has passed away and the 
feudal dues, which still legally exist, are on the eve 
of being finally abolished. The Monarchy, after 



INTRODUCTION 3 

many vicissitudes, has apparently emerged trium- 
phant from a struggle with the Parliament, but that 
triumph is not really complete. The authority of the 
king is henceforth limited, and there is no longer any 
question of depriving the representative assembly of 
a share in the government. England is becoming a 
manufacturing state, the north is rising in wealth 
and importance at the expense of the south, and 
English adventurers have extended their operations 
over the whole of the known world. Finally, the 
Church has been severed from the rest of Christen- 
dom ; it has become national at the expense of its 
political power and of its universality, and it is now 
assailed by the growth of Nonconformity, which has 
but recently threatened its very existence. 

Of the many changes here indicated, two stand out 
with especial prominence : the growth of liberty, and 
the growth of what may be described as insularity. 
Between the two movements there is a close con- 
nection. Feudalism, as a system, was bound up with 
the land, and the greatness of the feudal barons lay 
in their value in time of war. As long as the kings 
of England were more or less constantly occupied 
upon the Continent, the Baronage retained its impor- 
tance, and though the occasional necessities of the 
Monarchy might compel an appeal to Parliament, 
yet the royal ministers were selected from the class 
which supplied the generals of brigade in the expe- 
ditions across the Channel. When these expeditions 
ceased, a blow was struck at Feudalism — a blow 
which was all the heavier because it was followed by 
an attack upon the spiritual peers also. The political 



4 INTRODUCTION 

power of the Church rested upon its universality, 
and when the Reformation cut off the English 
Church from the rest of Christendom, it led naturally 
to a decline in the temporal greatness of churchmen. 
Hitherto, they had been a class apart : they pos- 
sessed their own courts ; they were, at least theoreti- 
cally, subjects of the Vicar of Christ as well as of the 
King of England ; and, by their vow of celibacy, 
they appeared to be withdrawn from a large part of 
the ordinary cares and troubles of the world. At the 
same time, much of the wealth of the clergy passed 
into lay hands, and this fact further contributed to 
reduce the power of the Church. 

Now with the cessation of wars in France, with the 
abandonment of schemes for a continental empire, 
and with the gradual withdrawal of England from 
the concerns of Europe, attention was turned more 
and more to commerce. And thus the very causes 
which depressed the Baronage and the Church con- 
tributed to the rise of a middle class, capable of 
taking the places of the old ministers. In short, the 
balance of political power was changed, and England, 
having ceased to be a military state, gradually 
became truly free. Among the causes which led to 
the final triumph of liberty, the growth of insularity 
was not the least important. 

The steps which led to the establishment of a 
Limited Monarchy — limited, that is, not by the 
rebellious character of a class of great nobles, but by 
a rational partition of authority between the sovereign 
and the representatives of the nation — may be sum- 
marised. In the reign of Edward III., the first step 



INTRODUCTION 5 

was made in the Hundred Years' War, which was 
nonfeudal in its inception and which compelled the 
king to conciliate Parliament for the sake of its 
financial support. At the deposition of Richard II., 
a second step was made ; the Monarchy lost its 
feudal character when the crown was transmitted to a 
collateral branch of the dynasty in accordance with 
a theory unknown to Feudalism. In the subsequent 
faction-fight of the Wars of the Roses, the Baronage 
was destroyed ; and in the strong Monarchy, in- 
augurated by Edward IV. and perfected by the 
Tudors, there was found a safeguard against a 
recrudescence of feudal anarchy. At the same time, 
the idea of a continental empire was finally aban- 
doned, a policy of isolation was adopted, and the 
energies of Englishmen were turned from France to 
the sea. And the Reformation accomplished in the 
Church the same work which had been done by 
other agencies in the State. The peculiar character 
of the Tudor Monarchy raised a new body in the 
country which should be capable of resisting the 
absolutist attempts of the Stuarts ; and the Great 
Rebellion was the final act in the drama. At that 
time, the middle class, or, more accurately, a party 
composed of the men whom the Tudors had trained, 
withstood and overthrew the Monarchy, and, though 
they failed to make England a republic, they secured 
her for ever from the danger of an absolutism. 

The struggle, which fills this period of some three 
centuries, may, then, be divided into four general 
periods. In the first, the Monarchy loses its feudal 
character. In the second, a constitutional interlude 



O INTRODUCTION 

ends in anarchy and the destruction of the Baronage. 
In the third, a new opposition rises under the aegis of 
a strong Monarchy. And in the fourth, this new- 
opposition triumphs over the very power to which it 
owed its existence, and inaugurates that system of 
government which prevails, if in a somewhat modified 
form, in our own time. 




II 



ENGLAND IN 1350 



It is necessary to preface the actual history of 
this period by relating, very shortly, the events of the 
years immediately preceding the date at which it 
begins, and by examining, with greater detail, the 
causes of that great war upon which England was 
engaged in 1350. For not only did that struggle 
occupy the attention of Englishmen, during the 
greater part of Edward lll.'s reign, to the exclusion 
of other matters, but it had also a very great effect 
both upon the foreign policy of the country and 
upon its internal affairs. 

Edward had ascended the throne as a result of 
the intrigues of his mother, Isabella of France, and 
of her accomplice, Mortimer, who had enjoyed the 
support of the great barons as opposed to the 
personal favourites of the late king. The discontent 
of the same nobles enabled Edward to overthrow 
the clique to whom he owed his crown, and at the 
age of nineteen to assume the gov^ernment in person 
(1330). His earlier years were occupied by the 
affairs of Scotland ; the recognition of Bruce, by 



8 ENGLAND IN I35O 

the Treaty of Northampton had been one of the 
most unpopular of Mortimer's acts, and Edward 
was obh'ged, by the force of circumstances, to attempt 
to avenge the reverses of his father. He accom- 
plished this — at least, to a certain extent — by the 
victory of Halidon Hill, but he abandoned the 
policy of Edward I. in favour of a less attractive, 
but more effective, course of action. Recognising 
that it would be futile to attempt the subjugation 
of a country, whose sons were wedded to independ- 
ence and which abounded in impregnable fastnesses, 
he determined to reduce it to such a degree of 
weakness that it could not injure him, and that 
he should have a controlling influence in it. The 
claims of Edward Balliol, the son of that Balliol 
whom Edward I. had declared king, afforded him an 
occasion for breaking the recent peace. Professing 
his desire to restore the rightful Prince, he invaded 
Scotland with an overwhelming force. Bruce was 
dead ; his successor, David, was a minor ; and 
Balliol was not without several supporters. At the 
battle of Halidon Hill (1333), the Scots were 
defeated with great loss, and the English king 
placed his protege on the throne. Balliol's reign 
was short and troubled, but the internal dissensions 
of Scotland freed England from all danger on the 
north. At a later date, David fell into Edward's 
hands, being taken prisoner at Neville's Cross (1346), 
and he was so well treated that, when he was even- 
tually ransomed, he was little more than Edward's 
viceroy, having become a strong partisan of England. 
In this way, Edward accomplished his aims with 




P^oto'\ [Emery Walker. 

KING EDWARD III. (1312-I377). 

From his monuinent in Westminster Abbey. 



10 ENGLAND IN I35O 

regard to Scotland, and gave, perhaps, the first 
indication of the poHcy of controUing, as opposed 
to conquering, states. Edward I. had attempted to 
unite Great Britain by force ; his grandson, warned 
by his failure, was content to ensure that he should 
possess a predominant voice in the affairs of Scot- 
land, while he recognised the nominal independence 
of that kingdom. And in his care for the substance, 
and disregard for the name, of power, there is seen 
a distinct advance towards the theories which prevail 
at the present day. 

The same change of policy is to be marked in 
the relations of Edward with France. The Hundred 
Years' War was unlike any previous contest, and was 
not the outcome of the old and bitter rivalry between 
the Capetians and the Plantagenets. Hitherto the 
struggles which had taken place between France 
and England had been, to a great extent, the out- 
come of the natural antipathy of near neighbours. 
Henceforth, they have a much deqper significance ; 
the strife becomes eternal, and, despite occasional 
interruptions, is never totally extinguished. The 
causes of this war were fourfold : Edward's personal 
character, the assistance given by the French to the 
Scotch, the question of Guienne, and the question 
of Flanders. And of these causes the first and the 
second were subsidiary ; while of the two remaining, 
the latter was the more important.^ 

' It is to be noted that M. Deprez ( Les Preliminaires de la Guerre 
de Cent Ans) holds that the true aim of the war was the retention of 
Guienne ; but it seems that the pecuhar character of the struggle was 
due to the question of Flanders. A defensive war for Guienne was 
wholly in accord with " feudal " ideas, whereas a war on behalf of the 



ROBERT OF ARTOIS II 

In the outbreak of war, Edward's personal cha- 
racter had its share. He was naturally of a war-like 
disposition and anxious for military glory, as well 
as endowed with a strong belief in his own capacity 
for generalship. His reign could not have been a 
peaceful one in any case, and since France afforded 
ampler scope for him than Scotland, a French war 
was probable. He was imbued also with the spurious 
chivalry which characterises the later Middle Ages— 
with a kind of bastard knight-errantry— and this led 
him to espouse the cause of Robert of Artois. Robert 
was a French baron, who having lost his estates 
and failed in an attempt to regain them by whole- 
sale forgery, fled from justice, took refuge in Eng- 
land, and asked the help of Edward for the recovery 
of his lands. Such a request appealed to the knight- 
errant in the English king, and was an additional 
reason for an attack upon France. The fact that 
Robert was, in modern phrase, a criminal had no 
weight. He posed as an injured man and, as 
Edward was anxious to help some one, he did not 
inquire too closely into the genuineness of the in- 
juries. As has been said, his attitude was character- 
istic of the time. Already the days of genuine 
chivalry were past. There was much talk of devo- 
tion to the fair sex, to the weak, and to the oppressed. 
Of real gallantry and nobility there was little, and 
such pretexts, as the case of Robert of Artois 
afforded, were merely used to enable men to satisfy 
their love of war. Both Edward and his son were 

Flemmings was unjustifiable, or inexplicable, according to those same 
theories. 



12 ENGLAND IN I35O 

typical men of the time in which they lived. They 
had every sympathy for the misfortunes of the great, 
none for those of the countless poor. The Black 
Prince could wait upon his captive liege lord and 
console him for his defeat, but he could also order 
the wholesale butchery of Limoges. The tears of a 
woman in distress could move the hearts of the 
nobles, if she were noble also ; the cries of children, 
murdered in cold blood, fell upon deaf ears. And 
so Edward made war with a light heart, and alleged 
as one of his justifications the wrongs of a convicted 
forger. 

During the war with Scotland Edward found that 
the party of Bruce was receiving help from France. 
Philip VI. sent both ships and men to the Scotch, 
and when the young king fled before Balliol, it was 
to Paris that he went. Here he was well enter- 
tained and granted the castle of Chateau Gaillard, 
while the French king continued to support the 
regency and tried by all means in his power to 
thwart the English plans. Edward complained of 
this conduct ; but he could obtain no satisfaction, and 
he had, therefore, a just reason for war, on these 
grounds alone. 

But had the only causes of dispute been Edward's 
own character and the French policy in Scotland, 
the war would have been far less important and 
might have degenerated into a petty struggle such 
as that between Edward I. and Philip the Fair. As 
a matter of fact, however, there were other and more 
potent reasons to induce Edward to attack France, 
and these are to be found in the questions of Guienne 



THE FLEMMISH QUESTION 1% 

and Flanders. In the South of France, the relics 
of the inheritance of Henry II. were still in the 
possession of England— which held the provinces 
of Guienne and Gascony— parts of the old duchy 
of Aquitaine. They included the basin of the 
Garonne and the important towns of Bayonne and 
Bordeaux. These two places were the seat of a 
flourishing trade in wine, which was one of the chief 
sources of English wealth. It was the policy of 
France, from the time of Philip the Fair and even 
from an earlier date, to encroach gradually upon the 
English territories. Charles IV. had filched away 
several towns — unimportant in themselves, but 
important from a relative point of view. Philip 
pursued his predecessor's policy and declined to 
make restitution when Edward complained. And, 
since the gradual progress of the French threatened 
the whole of the English possessions, and thus the 
existing trade, it is here that the first true cause of 
war is to be found. 

The question of Flanders was still more important, 
since it was more pressing. There was a constant 
strife between the Count of Flanders and the great 
commercial cities, Ghent, Antwerp, and Bruges. The 
kings of France were the chief support of their 
vassals, the counts; while, on the other hand, the 
burgesses relied upon England, being very closely 
connected with that country by commercial ties. 
And, as the triumph of the count would have 
involved the practical annihilation of their wool 
trade with Flanders, the English kings had rendered 
consistent support to the popular party. Soon after 



14 ENGLAND IN l^^O 

the accession of Edward III. Philip had inflicted a 
crushing defeat upon the revolted Flemmings ; but 
their discontent continued, and they found an able 
leader in James Van Artevelde, a brewer of Ghent. 
He appealed to England for aid, and the necessity 
of saving him from the French — and thus securing 
the wool trade from interruption — contributed more 
than anything else to the declaration of war. 

As has been said already, the war which thus 
began was distinctly different from all former wars ; 
and its distinct character is very clearly shown in the 
claim of Edward to the French crown. This claim 
was certainly not a cause of war ; it was only really 
put forward after war had begun, and may be 
regarded rather as an effect, or, at most, as a pretext 
for aggression. The weakness of the claim is at 
once obvious. Edward's argument was that, while 
the Salic Law barred females from the succession,- 
it permitted inheritance through them, and that as 
heir to Isabella, he was therefore the rightful king. 
Actually the Salic Law, which he was bound to 
admit in order to put forward any claim, made no 
mention of this particular point, and thus gave a 
silent denial to Edward's theory. But, even if it had 
expressly stipulated that inheritance through the 
female line was admissible, the English king was 
not the nearest heir. Charles the Bad, King of 
Navarre, was the grandson of Louis X., Isabella's 
eldest brother, and was, therefore, the representative 
of the elder branch. Edward was compelled to 
qualify his position, and to declare that the nearest 
to the common ancestor, Philip IV., was the true heir. 



THE CLAIM TO THE FRENCH THRONE 1 5 

But this contention sensibly weakened his title, since 
the contrary position had not only been upheld by 
Edward I., in the award of Berwick, but also tacitly 
admitted by Edward III. when he claimed that 
Edward Balliol was the rightful king of Scotland. 
Further, the English king had done homage to Philip 
VI., and expressly recognised him as his liege lord, 
and at a later date he first deliberately opposed his 
own views— in the case of the Breton succession— 
and then abandoned them in the treaty of Bretigni. 
It is, indeed, quite clear that Edward had no real 
belief in the justice of his claim, and that it was 
merely put forward in order to place the struggle 
upon a more national basis, and to conciliate feudal 
feeling.i In previous wars the English kings had 
been greatly hampered and hindered from pursuing 
such advantages as they might gain by the considera- 
tion that they were fighting against their feudal 
superior. Their own barons were reluctant to attack 
the person of the French king. On more than one 
occasion the English had allowed all the fruits of 
victory to be snatched from them by giving way 
to the dictates of the feudal conscience. Edward 
resolved to overcome these difficulties by a simple, if 
novel, device. He claimed the throne of France, and 
thus changed the whole character of the war. It was 
no longer a conflict between the vassal king- of 
England and his overlord, but between two rival 

^ The Flemmings requested Edward to assume the title of "King 
of France," but it may be suggested that this only indicates the fact 
that they also realised the advantages which would accrue to them 
from such an act. 



l6 ENGLAND IN I35O 

claimants to the same dignity. So far from feeling 
compunction at attacking his liege, Edward con- 
stantly referred to his subject, " Sir Philip of Valois," 
while his partisans could now assert that they were 
defending their feudal superior against his revolted 
vassals. In these considerations may be found the 
first cause which led to the making of the claim. 
But another circumstance had great weight. To the 
feudal mind the only reasonable wars were those 
waged for the recovery or retention of feudal pos- 
sessions. A war in defence of trade did not appeal 
to the baronial mind, which disdained such sordid 
considerations. Edward, on the other hand, was 
really fighting for his trade, and thus his cause 
needed strengthening from the feudal standpoint. 
A few unimportant towns were perhaps at stake, 
but their recovery would not have been enough for 
Edward's purpose. He wished to humble France to 
such a degree as to prevent all possibility of future 
interruption of English trade, and in order to rouse 
the enthusiasm of the barons it was negessary to put 
forward a great ideal. The revival of the question of 
Normandy, Maine, and Anjou might have answered 
the purpose, but the claim to the whole of France 
was a much larger conception and, for the reasons 
already given, one better calculated to serve his pur- 
pose. Moreover, on the Oriental merchant's system 
of starting from an extravagantly high price and 
gradually coming down, the very vastness of Edward's 
claim would enable England to treat from a position 
of greater advantage. It was for such reasons as 
these that the claim was brought forward, as a 



CHARACTER OF AQUITAINE 1/ 

political expedient and not with any hope of 
realisation. It gave England a much more ad- 
vantageous position than she had enjoyed in previous 
wars ; it soothed feudal susceptibilities, and roused 
feudal ambitions ; it made the war a national conflict. 
As has been suggested already, the object of all 
previous struggles between England and France had 
been the recovery or retention of the Norman and 
Angevin lands on the Continent. And, to a certain 
extent, the present war partook of the same character, 
since one of the questions for settlement was whether 
England should retain her hold upon Guienne. But 
in this connection it is of the utmost importance 
to note that the English possessions in Southern 
France formed a political and ethnographical unity. 
Aquitaine — the tract of country south of the Loire 
and west of the mountains of Auvergne — had never 
been really united with the rest of France. In early 
times part of it was included in the Visigothic Septi- 
mania, as opposed to Frankish Gaul, and under the 
Carolingians it was a semi-independent duchy. For 
a short time it was attached to the French crown by 
the marriage of Louis VII. with Eleanor, the heiress 
of the duchy, but it was again lost by the divorce of 
the queen and her subsequent marriage with Henry 
of Anjou. In their sympathies, the people of Guienne 
and Gascony — which formed the larger part of 
Aquitaine — were more nearly akin to Spain than to 
France. There was, then, a marked contrast between 
a war for the retention of these provinces and one for 
the recovery of Normandy or Maine. The northern 
possessions of Henry II. were really part of France. 

3 



1 8 ENGLAND /TV I35O 

The inhabitants were thoroughly French in character, 
sympathy, and language. But the Gascons were a 
race apart, they, as a whole, were bitterly opposed to 
French rule, and they were never really amalgamated 
with the other subjects of the French crown until 
centuries after the time of the Hundred Years' War. 
In the fourteenth century they were willing subjects 
of the English, and not merely so because the union 
with England gave them greater freedom in their 
trade. At a later period we find them the mainstays 
of Protestantism, regarded with contempt by the 
polished Parisians, slow, uncouth, non-French ; the 
butt for the jests and gibes of courtiers and authors. 
A war to retain possession of lands inhabited by such 
a race was very different from a war for the retention 
of Normandy. The one was an attempt to enable a 
large number of people to follow their own inclina- 
tions, the other to divide by force of arms territories 
which were essentially one. In Guienne the English 
rule was popular ; in Normandy it was hated. And 
so the war of Edward III. in the south was very 
different from the expeditions of former kings in the 
north. To a certain extent its objects were antici- 
pated by Edward I., who fought merely to secure 
Guienne, but that king was essentially a lawyer, 
and his whole policy was modified by his strict 
observance of feudal rights, so that the parallel is 
incomplete. 

Both Henry II. and Edward I. had attempted to 
further their schemes in France by the formation 
of European coalitions, though neither had been 
successful. John had sought help from Germany, 




L^ 



20 ENGLAND .iV I35O 

and had identified himself with the excommunicated 
Otto IV., and the Emperor had fought for him at 
Bouvines. Edward III. made another attempt to 
gain allies, taking as his basis the Northern League 
of John. He tried to combine together the various 
interests opposed to France in the north-west ; and, 
as far as paper alliances went, he was quite successful. 
Flanders, as has been already seen, was largely in his 
favour, since the war was undertaken principally on 
behalf of the revolted cities ; and the English king 
spared no pains to consolidate this alliance by 
flattering the pride of Artevelde. In the modern 
Belgium he was connected by marriage with the 
Count of Hainault, and the Low Countries were thus 
practically united on his behalf He further 
attempted to attach to himself the small independent 
principalities lying on the eastern frontier of Flanders 
in the basin of the Rhine. Brabant, Cologne, Juliers, 
and Guelders entered into alliance with him, and 
soon afterwards Edward obtained an office, which 
apparently gave him some right to demand the 
services of the states of Western Germany. The 
Emperor, Lewis IV. of Bavaria, was involved in a 
struggle against a rival claimant, Frederic of Austria, 
and the latter received the support of the Papacy. 
But at this time the " Babylonish Captivity " had 
reduced the Pope to the position of a dependent of 
the French crown, and his policy was dictated to 
him by the Court of Paris. Edward, therefore, had 
little difficulty in inducing Lewis to make common 
cause with him against Philip VI. He received the 
title of " Imperial Vicar," which seemed to give him 



IMPORTANCE OP ARCHERS 21 

authority in the Empire. As a matter of fact, the 
alHance did little good. The Emperor was com- 
pletely occupied with his own troubles ; the minor 
princes were indifferent ; and the Flemmings were 
anxious only to secure local freedom. Yet Edward's 
League has a peculiar importance. If, as seems 
clear, the real object of the war was the humiliation 
of France, the alliance may be regarded as the proto- 
type of the great coalitions of the eighteenth century, 
as the first European combination formed with the 
object of checking the progress and ambition of the 
kings of France. 

Two more points in connection with the character 
of the French war remain to be considered ; and they 
are important because they helped indirectly to in- 
crease the power of Parliament. Before the time 
of Edward III. the main strength of all armies lay 
in the heavy cavalry, the feudal horsemen. In the 
Scotch wars of Edward I. the value of archers had 
been proved at Falkirk, and the Genoese had 
acquired a great reputation for their skill with the 
crossbow ; still, on the whole, infantry were regarded 
as being of only secondary importance. But in the 
Hundred Years' War a most important change was 
effected. The great victories of Crecy and Poitiers 
were gained by archers ; and they proved beyond 
question that the value of foot soldiers had been 
underestimated. Now, the archers were the plebeian 
part of the mediaeval army. They were drawn from 
the class which did not own land, or at least did not 
own large estates. The feudal barons despised 
service on foot, and were unfitted for it. As a 



22 ENGLAND IN I35O 

natural result, anything which tended to minimise 
the importance of cavalry was a blow to feudalism, 
and the rise of the archers contributed indirectly 
to that of the Commons. For the strength of the 
Baronage and their predominant influence on the 
government depended upon their value in time of 
war. As long as their help was essential to success- 
ful war, they were important in time of peace. They 
must be conciliated at all costs. As soon as this 
ceased to be the case their greatness was over. The 
Hundred Years' War marks the beginning of the 
decline of feudalism in England — the first step in the 
transference of power to the Commons. For up 
to this time the barons ruled, though the Commons 
might advise, but henceforth the government 
gradually became vested more and more in the 
middle class. 

At the same time, the growth of the navy contributed 
to a similar result. Up to this period the periodical 
invasions of France had been purely military under- 
takings. The question of communications and of 
the command of the sea had not arisen. The French 
navy, which, at earliest can only be dated from 
the acquisition of Normandy, was as yet practically 
non-existent. Such naval operations as there were 
resulted rather from the rivalry between the Norman 
fishermen and the sailors of the Cinque Ports than 
from the policy of the rival government. But about 
the time of the accession of Philip VI. more attention 
began to be directed to naval matters. A large fleet 
was raised, partly from the ports of Normandy, but 
mainly from the Genoese, and the command of the 




^ 

^ 

k 



^ 



24 ENGLAND IN I35O 

Channel was disputed. As a result the English 
Government made strenuous efforts to increase the 
efficiency of the navy, and more interest was displayed 
in maritime affairs than hitherto. And accordingly 
the lower class rose in importance still more, since 
they supplied the sailors as well as the infantry, and 
there was a corresponding decline in the influence of 
the Baronage, who were useless so far as the sea was 
concerned. 

Enough has now been said to show that there was 
a great difference between the Hundred Years' War 
and all previous contests between England and 
France. To sum up these points of contrast, it was 
waged with a new object, and it was fought under 
new political and military conditions. Hitherto the 
personal ambitions of rulers had been at least a very 
potent, if not the sole, factor in every war, whereas 
the present struggle was essentially popular. The 
more minute consideration of the effects of the war 
upon England may be postponed for the present, 
but it may be asserted in this place that, generally 
speaking, the war marks a distinct advance towards 
modern conditions in policy, in government, and in 
the social condition of the people. For this advance 
the struggle between England and France was 
responsible, directly or indirectly, and in this fact 
lies its ultimate importance. 

In conclusion, it remains to sketch very briefly the 
progress of events from the outbreak of war to the 
time at which this period properly begins. The first 
campaigns were abortive. Edward, as might have 
been expected, landed in Flanders and secured the 



BATTLE OF SLUYS 2$ 

temporary freedom of the cities, but more than this 
he could not do. PhiHp studiously avoided a decisive 
battle, and contented himself with intriguing among 
the German allies of England. Despite his office 
as Imperial Vicar, Edward found himself without 
any great support. The Flemmings were desirous 
only of protection against their count, and the 
neighbouring princelings were easily won over by 
France. As a result, the military operations came 
to nothing, and the only important battle was the 
naval engagement of Sluys (1340). There Edward 
caught the French fleet, which had been collected 
to cut the communications between England and 
Flanders, at anchor and so badly placed that its 
superiority in numbers was valueless. The battle 
which ensued resulted in the practical annihilation 
of the French navy. But even this success had little 
result, and, hampered by lack of adequate supplies 
and by the disaffection of his allies, Edward was glad, 
before the end of the same year, to conclude a truce. 
This armistice lasted for nearly two years, and was 
marked by the collapse of Edward's coalition. Philip 
had already won over the small German states, and 
now the Emperor himself deserted England, in the 
hope of gaining the good offices of the French king 
in his quarrel with the Pope. Artevelde continued to 
maintain his friendship with the English ; but all the 
other allies made peace. 

The truce was eventually ended by a dispute con- 
cerning the succession to the duchy of Brittany. On 
the death of Duke John III., his brother, the Earl 
of Montfort, and Charles of Blois, the husband of his 



26 ENGLAND IN I35O 

niece, claimed the succession (1342). The French 
peers supported the latter, and Montfort did homage 
to Edward. Civil war followed, and the French and 
English came into conflict. No decisive result was 
reached, however, and another truce was soon after- 
wards concluded. At the same time the Pope offered 
to arbitrate. Both parties agreed to allow him to do 
so ; but the fact of his residence at Avignon placed 
him too much under French control, and the attempt 
naturally failed. War broke out again, but the scene 
of operations was changed. Just before the renewal 
of hostilities Artevelde was assassinated, and, being 
thus deprived of his chief supporter in Flanders, 
Edward determined to attack France in another 
quarter. An army was despatched to Guienne, and 
there the Earl of Derby defeated the French at 
Auberoche. He failed, however, to profit by his 
victory, and was soon afterwards blockaded at 
Aiguillon (1345). For his relief Edward collected 
a large army, and landed at La Hogue in Normandy 
with the object of drawing off the French from the 
south by means of a counter attack. He advanced 
in an easterly direction towards Paris, but found that, 
though he had gained his immediate object, he was 
in danger of being surrounded. He therefore turned 
northwards to join the Flemmings, and had reached 
Cregy before Philip, who had pursued him in hot 
haste, came up. Edward, thus brought to bay, 
selected his own position and fought on the defensive. 
The impetuosity of the French nobles and the skill 
of the English archers resulted in the total destruc- 
tion of Philip's army (1346). Edward, saved from 



THE BLACK DEATH 2/ 

apparently certain destruction, continued his north- 
ward march, and laid siege to Calais. The fall of 
that town was the only actual fruit of the great 
victory, but this gave England a valuable base for 
future operations against Northern France. Another 
truce followed — the result of the complete exhaustion 
of both parties — and it was prolonged owing to the 
ravages of the Black Death. That terrible plague 
appeared in France soon after the battle of Cregy, 
and before long extended to England. The medical 
skill of the time was powerless to cope with it. 
Thousands of persons died, and it was asserted, 
though this may be an exaggeration, that half of the 
total population of England perished. In any case, 
the fabric of society was shaken to its very founda- 
tions. Famine, the result of the scarcity of labour, 
followed in the wake of the plague. The labouring 
classes were in a state of incipient revolt. And, as a 
result, all military operations were suspended. The 
year 1350 found England at peace, but labouring 
under a greater calamity than the most calamitous 
war. 




Ill 



THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 



(I 350-1 399) 



The truce, which had been concluded soon after 
the fall of Calais and prolonged owing to the ravages 
of the Black Death, continued in force for about seven 
years. Both countries were too much occupied with 
internal troubles to be anxious to renew the war. 
In England the labouring classes were seething with 
discontent, while in France the peasantry were in a 
condition of appalling distress, and the calamities 
attendant upon unsuccessful war were increased by 
the prevailing famine. Utterly exhausted, the two 
nations rnade several abortive attempts to conclude 
a permanent peace. Edward reduced his demands 
to the cession of Aquitaine in full sovereignty, but 
John, who had succeeded Philip VI. (1350), steadily 
refused to alienate any French territory, and con- 
sequently the negotiations came to nothing. The 
English began to prepare for war, and just at the 
same time their prospects of success were increased 
by the rash conduct of the King of France. Charles 



28 



RENEWAL OF THE WAR 29 

the Bad, of Navarre, who had been a veritable thorn 
in the side of PhiHp VI., was arrested and imprisoned, 
and his followers threw themselves into the arms of 
England. Encouraged by this accession of strength, 
Edward made a great effort. In addition to rein- 
forcing the Montfort party in Brittany, he placed two 
armies in the field. In person he began to advance 
from Calais towards Paris, but he was recalled by the 
news that the Scotch had taken Berwick, and were 
ravaging the northern counties. On the other hand, 
the Black Prince, starting from Guienne, traversed 
Southern France to Carcassonne and Narbonne. 
Hitherto the fertile lands of Languedoc had escaped 
attack, but now they were wasted with fire and sword. 
The English army, which was largely composed of 
mercenaries, was almost mutinous for want of pay, 
and was given full leave to pillage in all directions. 
There was no force in the district capable of offering 
any opposition. The Black Prince returned to 
Bordeaux, laden with spoil and the curses of the 
unhappy inhabitants (1355). The wanton cruelty of 
his proceedings left a lasting impression, all the more 
vivid because war had been unknown in that country 
for many years, and the desire for revenge which 
his ravages inspired had no small share in causing 
the ultimate national uprising against the English 
invaders. 

At the same time and in the same way Edward 
himself ravaged Southern Scotland. The Scotch had 
allied with France, and had invaded England at the 
moment of the campaign of Crecy. The battle of 
Neville's Cross, where King David was taken prisoner 



30 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

and his chief nobles either killed or captured, had 
resulted, and, for a while, a precarious peace had 
been maintained between the two countries. But, 
with the absence of both the English king and his 
son in France, an opportunity for revenge seemed to 
have come. The rapid return of Edward compelled 
the Scotch to abandon Berwick and retreat, but they 
were pursued by the English army, and the name 
of " the Burnt Candlemas " testifies to the character 
of Edward's last expedition into Scotland. He took, 
indeed, signal vengeance. His army swept over the 
Lowlands, destroying every living thing "and burning 
crops and houses. But the very completeness of the 
destruction compelled the invaders to retreat, and, 
assailed by light troops and oppressed by famine, 
the English army lost heavily. Shortly afterwards 
(1356) David was replaced on the Scottish throne, 
and peace was established, but the memory of "the 
Burnt Candlemas " lingered, and served to increase 
the already existing antipathy' between the two 
peoples. 

The success of his raid in Southern France en- 
couraged the Black Prince to attempt a repetition 
of his exploit in the following year, but this time 
he entered the central districts and marched directly 
upon Paris. After reaching the neighbourhood of 
Blois he found that his further progress was barred, 
and learned that John was approaching with an 
overwhelming force to cut off his retreat. He began, 
therefore, to retrace his steps, but, failing to realise 
his danger to the full, delayed his march by besieging 
a castle and was overtaken near Poitiers (1356). 



POITIERS 31 

The French king foolishly wasted some precious 
time in fruitless negotiation, and the Black Prince had 
almost succeeded in making his escape when John 
ordered the attack. The English were favoured by 
their position, since trees concealed their operations, 
and by the attempt of the French king to turn the 
lessons of previous battles to account, which led 
him to dismount his vanguard. These dismounted 
knights, cumbered by their heavy armour, could not 
move with sufficient rapidity ; they were harassed by 
the English archers and repulsed, and in their retreat 
somewhat disordered the cavalry of the second divi- 
sion. That division shared the fate of the first ; a 
final effort on the part of the reserves, led by the king 
in person, to retrieve the battle was ineffectual, and 
by nightfall the Black Prince had gained a complete 
and surprising victory. John himself was taken 
prisoner, and many of the chief nobles of France 
either shared the fate of their master or were left 
dead on the field. But, despite this great success, the 
English were unable to follow up their victory. They 
retreated to Bordeaux, whence the prince and the 
captive king sailed to England. A truce was soon 
afterwards concluded, and for a time active opera- 
tions were suspended. 

The condition of France at this time warrants the 
assumption that had the English actively pressed on 
the war, the conquest of the country might have been 
completed. Both countries had taken large bodies 
of men into their pay for the war, and when the truce 
was concluded these soldiers found their employment 
gone. Accordingly, they formed themselves into 



32 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

bands known as " Free Companies," and spread over 
France in search of booty. The misery thus caused 
was increased by the revolt of Paris, which became 
the scene of the most terrible atrocities, and by the 
escape of Charles the Bad, who put himself at the 
head of the mob of the capital and levied war against 
the Government. To crown all, the peasants broke 
out into a revolt, known as the Jacquerie, which 
spread over Northern and Western France. The 
nobles appeared to have been paralysed with fear. 
In any case, there was no resistance for a while, and 
the rebels massacred all who did not join them, 
sparing neither age nor sex, and filling the country 
with scenes which cannot be described. But the 
comparative inaction of the English gave France 
time to recover, at least to a certain extent. Charles 
the Dauphin, who acted as' Regent, slowly began to 
make some headway. He recovered Paris and put 
the ringleaders of the mob to death, while he patched 
up a peace with the King of Navarre. Soon after- 
wards the Jacquerie were crushingly defeated at 
Meaux (1358) and the nobles, combining against 
them, began to exterminate the remnants. By the 
time that the war with England was renewed, France 
was largely a desert, but it had a desert's peace. 

The suspension of vigorous hostilities on the part 
of England may be accounted for by the hope which 
Edward entertained of being able to obtain his 
objects by diplomacy. He so far succeeded as to 
induce the captive John to sign a treaty by which 
practically all the old inheritance of Henry H. was 
ceded in full sovereignty to the English king. But 



34 '^tiE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

the Dauphin indignantly rejected terms which in- 
volved the practical subjection of France, and the 
States General eagerly upheld him. Accordingly, 
negotiations were broken off, and Edward landed in 
Normandy with by far the most formidable army he 
had ever put into the field. He marched across 
France into Burgundy, from which he drew a heavy 
ransom, and he defied the Dauphin from before the 
walls of Paris. But Charles would not allow his 
generals to fight, the country afforded no support to 
the invaders, and the English, threatened with the 
exhaustion of their supplies and harassed by small 
bodies of French, began to retire on Aquitaine. 
Near Chartres the army was overtaken by a severe 
thunderstorm. The desolation of the country and 
the sight of men and horses struck by lightning filled 
Edward with superstitious terror. In the storm he 
seemed to see the anger of the Deity directed against 
him, and, suddenly abandoning his schemes of 
conquest, he opened negotiations with Charles. A 
peace was soon concluded, which, while involving 
great sacrifices, was necessary to France and far less 
humiliating than the treaty which John had signed. 
By the peace of Bretigni all Aquitaine, including 
Poitou, together with Calais and Ponthieu, was ceded 
to Edward in full sovereignty, free of all feudal 
obligations. In return the English king definitely 
abandoned his claim to the French throne and to 
Normandy, Maine, and Anjou, though he still con- 
tinued to couple France with England in his royal 
title. John was to be ransomed for three million 
crowns, to be paid in six annual instalments, and 



TREATY OF BRETIGNI 35 

was to be released on the payment of the first, 
hostages being given in exchange (1360). 

By this treaty Edward had secured, apparently, 
the objects for which he went to war. France was 
weakened to the last degree, deprived of all legal 
right to encroach upon the English lands, and 
rendered incapable of either effectively renewing the 
struggle or of interfering with the commercial 
interests of England. But, actually, the peace was 
soon interrupted, and assisted by a series of fortunate 
accidents and by the unwise measures of the English, 
Charles V. before long restored his country to 
prosperity, and neutralised all Edward's success. 
The historical importance of the treaty of Bretigni 
lay not in the actual terms of peace, but in the new 
principles which it involved and the blow which it 
dealt to the feudal theory. Hitherto, whatever might 
have been the actual effects of an agreement between 
two states, the legal result had been simply, so far as 
cessions of land were concerned, the granting of a 
new fief For example, when Charles the Simple 
handed over Normandy to Rolf, the feudal lawyer 
regarded the transaction, which in effect created an 
independent state, as the acquisition of a new vassal 
by the Carolingian monarch. Rolf and his successors 
recognised Charles and his successors as their over- 
lords, and though Henry H. was a far more powerful 
sovereign than Louis VH., yet he never for a 
moment attempted to deny to the French king 
the respect due to a feudal superior. But in the 
present case an entirely new idea was found. John 
alienated a large tract of country and with it 



36 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

abandoned distinctly all those rights over it, which 
in feudal law belonged to the grantor. Edward was 
recognised as having, in feudal terms, no overlord 
save God, in respect of his lands in France. And 
this new type of grant being contrary to all feudal 
law struck a heavy blow at the whole existing system 
of land tenure. It was a legal revolution and in this 
fact lies its importance. Henceforward, conquest is 
no longer a synonym, legally speaking, for the 
granting of a new fief. It involves an abdication of 
feudal rights and becomes conquest in the modern 
sense. Moreover, the treaty of Bretigni marks an 
advance in political theory. • Edward I. would have 
been incapable of conceiving such an agreement ; but 
his grandson was less imbued with feudal ideas and 
showed a proper appreciation of the insecurity of his 
transmarine possessions, when another and hostile 
king had constant opportunities for interference and 
when he was responsible to that king for his 
administration. Ignorantly, perhaps, but . none the 
less surely, Edward III. helped, in no small degree, 
to revolutionise the character of monarchy, by 
dealing such a vigorous blow to the accepted 
system. 

As a permanent peace the treaty of Bretigni 
failed. The rivalry between the two countries was 
not extinguished, and in Brittany, which had not 
been included in the general pacification, the forces 
of the two kingdoms came into contact. The 
measures taken by Charles V., who became king 
of France four years after the peace, to restore order 
in his country led to the renewal of war. The Free 



NAVARETTE 3/ 

Companies had increased, rather than suspended, 
their depredations after the end of the active 
operations, and the first necessity of France was 
to be deHvered from this scourge. The affairs of 
Castile afforded the desired opportunity. Peter the 
Cruel had irritated his subjects by his tyranny 
beyond endurance ; his bastard brother, Henry of 
Trastamara, raised the standard of revolt ; and when 
Peter caused his wife, a French princess, to be put to 
death, Charles V. threw his whole weight on the side 
of the rebels. The mercenary bands were enlisted 
for service in Spain under Du Guesclin, a general of 
no slight ability. Peter was driven from Castile, and 
the French king enjoyed the double advantage of 
having freed his kingdom from one source of 
weakness and of having established a useful ally 
on the throne of a neighbouring state. 

But the deposed monarch proceeded to Bordeaux, 
where the Black Prince resided as Viceroy of 
Aquitaine. Here he played upon the chivalrous ideas 
of the prince and, by promising moreover to defray 
liberally all the expenses of the expedition, induced 
him to assist in the overthrow of Henry of Trastamara. 
The English army entered Spain and gained a 
decisive victory at Navarette (1367). Du Guesclin 
was taken prisoner, the usurper fled to Avignon, and 
Peter was again seated upon the throne of Castile. 
But when the Black Prince pressed for the stipulated 
payment, he was met with excuses and finally a 
refusal. His army returned to Bordeaux in a state 
of almost open mutiny, while their leader's health 
was irretrievably shattered by the effects of the 



38 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

Spanish climate. Indeed, from first to last, the 
expedition was a political error and one attended 
with disastrous results. The position of the English 
in Aquitaine was by no means strong. Though 
Guienne was in favour of a close connection with 
England, Poitou was heart and soul in the French 
interest, and its inhabitants had zealously opposed 
the cession of the province. " Our allegiance still 
belongs to France," was the declaration of the people 
of Rochelle, when they found that they could not 
prevent the fulfilment of the Treaty of Bretigni. 
Even in the south there was anti-English feeling, 
the result of the viceroyalty of the Black Prince, 
which was irksome to the people, who had hoped 
to be practically independent. And the financial 
difficulties which arose from the Spanish war 
presently united all in opposition to the English 
rule. Disappointed of the promised subsidy from 
Peter, and without other means, the Black Prince 
was obliged to resort to heavy taxation, and thus 
naturally alienated the few supporters he had. At 
the same time he instructed many of his mercenaries, 
who had openly revolted, to ravage the territories of 
France, and when they did so, though Aquitaine was 
relieved to a certain extent, the patriotism of the 
French was roused, and it was resolved to make a 
supreme effort to expel the English. Charles V. 
saw that his opportunity had come. Edward III. 
was prematurely old, his son was slowly dying, 
and the French subjects of England were ripe for 
revolt. When the leading nobles of Aquitaine took 
the irrevocable step of applying to Paris for re- 



SACK OF LIMOGES 39 

dress Charles received them cordially, and, after 
some hesitation, in flagrant violation of the Treaty 
of Bretigni, cited the Black Prince to appear before 
the Royal Court as a vassal, under pain of forfeiture. 
The natural refusal of the viceroy to do so was the 
signal for the renewal of war ( 1 369). 

The policy of France was now conducted on much 
more rational lines. Charles was a statesman and 
not a warrior ; he despised that thirst for military 
glory which had been so fatal to Philip and John, and 
he forbade his generals to fight any pitched battles. 
In place of this, the French availed themselves of 
the friendly feelings of the people. Poitou was quickly 
recovered, and Brittany, where the English party 
had triumphed, changed sides and expelled Montfort. 
In vain did the English make raids into France, 
unable to force a battle and harried throughout their 
marches, they suffered severely but accomplished 
nothing useful, and their cause everywhere declined. 
At last the important city of Limoges opened its 
gates to the French, and the Black Prince, who had 
hitherto unwillingly remained a passive spectator of 
the disasters of his country, arose from his bed of 
sickness and made one last effort to save the fruits 
of his earlier victories. Borne en a litter at the head 
of his army, he reached Limoges, and took that city 
by storm (1370). But its capture was disastrous 
to England and disgraceful to the Black Prince. 
Irritated by the wholesale treachery around him 
and by his own sickness, he ordered the total 
massacre of the citizens, and his last victory was 
stained with the blood of helpless women and 



40 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

children. The atrocity brought its own punishment. 
The revolted cities were strengthened in their 
resistance by the fear of a like fate, the other places 
in the provinces were roused to rebellion, and the 
effort which he had made exhausted the remainder 
of the Black Prince's strength. Shortly after the 
fall of Limoges, he returned to England to die. 
His successors lacked his ability and prestige, and 
the French proved uniformly successful. A Spanish 
squadron appeared in the Channel, as the ally of 
France, and off Rochelle gained a decisive victory 
(1372). The English fleet was practically annihilated, 
and for some time the command of the Channel was 
lost. The immediate effect of this defeat was to 
interrupt to a great extent the communications 
between England and Guienne and to hasten the 
loss of that province. It was in vain that a large 
army under John of Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, was 
despatched to France. Landing at Calais, the Duke 
marched through the heart of the country, but the 
French avoided a pitched battle and contented them- 
selves with cutting off all stragglers. Lancaster 
reached Bordeaux with the loss of nearly half his 
men, having done nothing to hinder the loss of 
Aquitaine. The attempt was not repeated, and 
within two years of the battle of Rochelle the 
triumph of Charles was complete, Bordeaux, 
Bayonne, Calais, and a few places of small im- 
portance alone remained to the English, of all the 
territory which they had acquired by the Treaty 
of Bretigni. 

There can be no doubt that the progress of the 




WILLIAM OF WYKEHAM (1324-I404). 

From a portrait by, J. Faber, in the Hall of New College, Oxford. 
{By kind permission o/the Warden.) 



42 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

French was accelerated by the internal condition 
of England. Premature old age prevented Edward 
III. from taking any very active share in the govern- 
ment, and the possession of power was disputed 
between two parties, headed by William of Wykeham 
and the Duke of Lancaster respectively. The former 
lost his authority as a result of the ill-success of 
the English arms in France (1371), and John of 
Gaunt assumed the practical government of the 
country, until the return of the Black Prince gave 
his opponents a new leader. The Good Parliament 
(1376) assembled under the auspices of the victor 
of Poitiers, the Lancastrian ministers were impeached 
and punished, and, though the Black Prince died 
before its work was completed, the same House of 
Commons was able to strike another blow at John of 
Gaunt's position by securing the formal recognition 
of the young Richard as heir to the throne. 
The Parliament, however, was unable to secure its 
work; a packed House of Commons restored Lancaster 
to power (1377), and the condemnation of his 
adherents was annulled or ignored. John of Gaunt 
was in a position of unrivalled superiority, when his 
rash and arrogant conduct in the matter of Wyclifif, 
and his unwise attack upon the liberties of London, 
roused fresh indignation against him. P>om the 
ensuing riot he barely escaped with his life, and in 
the last months of his father's reign he was compelled 
to adopt a conciliatory attitude. 

Richard H. succeeded his grandfather without 
opposition, but as he was only eight years old a 
regency was necessary. It was very soon found 



THE peasants' REVOLT 43 

to be impossible to exclude Lancaster, as had been 
intended, from the Council, and when he had been 
admitted his wealth and influence made him regent 
in all but name. He was met by almost insuperable 
difficulties. The French war dragged on, but it 
was England which now stood on the defensive. 
The Channel was dominated by a combined Franco- 
Spanish fleet, the Isle of Wight was invaded, the 
south coast was ravaged, and it was perhaps only 
the injudicious conduct of Charles V. in Brittany 
that saved England from invasion. But even this 
apparent piece of good fortune led to fresh troubles. 
The Bretons applied for help, and to supply it fresh 
taxation was necessary. A poll-tax was imposed, 
which, though graduated, spared no one, and which 
the very poor were totally unable to pay (1380)- 
Already there was discontent and distress in the 
country, and this new burden seems to have been 
the finishing touch. The peasants rose in fierce 
revolt throughout the south and east of England 
(1381). For a while the government seemed to be 
helpless, and was, perhaps, principally owing to the 
lack of an adequate leader that the rebellion was 
ended. The famous, but indefinite, promise of the 
young king obtained the dispersal of the most 
threatening band, and as soon as the peasantry had 
returned to their hornes Parliament eagerly seconded 
the nobles in their work of vengeance. 

The Peasants' Revolt proved to be the death-blow 
to the power of Lancaster. Though treated with 
marked consideration by the government, he seems 
to have realised that his unpopularity was too great 



44 '^HE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

for him to face, while he was accused of aiming at 
the crown and of having caused the failure of the 
warlike Bishop of Norwich's expedition to Flanders. 
Richard showed his growing distrust by naming 
the Earl of March, as heir to the throne, and the 
duke thought it prudent to depart to Spain, where 
he engaged in a war to establish his wife's claim 
to the crown of Castile. He was succeeded in his 
influence in England by his younger brother, 
Thomas of Gloucester, who secured the support of 
the Commons (1385). Richard had raised personal 
friends of low birth to high offices of state, the 
chief of them being De Vere, whom he made Duke 
of Ireland, and Michael de la Pole, whom he created 
Earl of Suffolk and to whom he gave the Chancellor- 
ship. Gloucester headed the opposition to these 
men. At his instigation, Suffolk was impeached 
and imprisoned, and a commission of reform was 
instituted (1386). Richard, having obtained a favour- 
able opinion from the judges, began to scheme for 
the overthrow of Gloucester, but the duke was 
warned and organised a defence. He was joined 
by four great lords, the Earl of Derby (afterwards 
Henry IV.), the Earl of Warwick, the Earl of 
Nottingham, and Lord Arundel. De Vere failed 
to oppose them successfully and fled, Richard gave 
way, and the triumph of the *' Lords Appellant," 
as the}/ were termed, was completed (1387). The 
Parliament which followed, the " Merciless " or 
" Wonderful " Parliament, was wholly in Gloucester's 
interest. All the royal ministers were found guilty 
of high treason, De Vere and Suffolk went into 



Richard's government 45 

exile, and the duke established his supremacy 
(1388). 

But at the end of a year, which was marked 
only by the conclusion of truces with France and 
Scotland, Richard effected a coup d'etat, declaring 
himself to be of age and assuming the government 
in person. But he showed marked moderation ; the 
personnel of the council was hardly changed, even 
Gloucester apparently retaining his seat, the " Lords 
Appellant " remained unpunished, and a conciliatory 
policy was pursued. For seven years England 
enjoyed excellent government. Some useful legis- 
lation was carried out, Ireland was pacified by a 
visit from the king and its government to some 
extent regulated, and the prestige of England abroad 
was restored by the recovery of Guienne, which 
revolted to the English after the death of Charles V. 
Lancaster returned home but made no attempt 
to secure the government, and Richard's position 
seemed to be permanently secured. On the death 
of his first wife he married Isabella, daughter of 
Charles VI., and concluded a twenty-five years' 
truce with France, so that both at home and 
abroad there was peace. But during all this time 
the king was preparing to take a signal revenge 
upon his old opponents. Just after his marriage he 
suddenly arrested Gloucester, Archbishop Arundel, 
and Warwick, the intrigues of the duke affording 
some sort of pretext. Parliament declared the 
former council of regency to have been guilty of 
high treason; Gloucester died, probably a violent 
death, in his prison at Calais ; Arundel and Warwick 



46 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

were banished (1397). Two of the "Appellants," 
Derby and Nottingham, escaped, having joined the 
royal party, and were rewarded by being made 
Dukes of Hereford and Norfolk respectively. The 
Acts of the " Wonderful Parliament " were re- 
pealed, and Richard, meeting with no resistance 
and supported by a subservient Parliament, ruled 
as an absolute monarch. When shortly afterwards 
Hereford and Norfolk accused each other of treason, 
Richard took the opportunity to complete the 
destruction of his enemies, and, acting on some 
unknown principle, banished both (1398). The 
removal of two such powerful subjects may 
have been wise, but the king committed a serious 
blunder when, on the death of Lancaster, he seized 
his lands. Hereford, availing himself of the absence 
of Richard in Ireland, landed in Yorkshire and was 
joined by the northern lords. The people had 
been irritated already by the oppression of the 
government ; the moderation of Hereford, who 
proclaimed that he desired only to recover his 
inheritance, won them over, and the king, finding 
that he had no support, surrendered. A Parlia- 
ment adjudged him to have forfeited his crown, 
Richard signed an act of abdication, and the new 
Duke of Lancaster was recognised as his successor 
by the unanimous voice of both Houses (1399). 

The character of Richard H. presents one of the 
most curious enigmas in history. It is a mass of 
apparent contradictions. For seven years he 
appears as a constitutional monarch, but then he 
suddenly changes into an unbridled despot. More- 



CHARACTER OF RICHARD //. 47 

over, he displayed a control of his real feelings 
which was nothing less than marvellous, a capacity 
for dissimulation worthy of a modern diplomatist, 
and, while at one time he was apparently the tool 
of favourites, at another he showed a marked 
capacity for government. It seems almost certain 
that his mind was unbalanced, but the theory that 
he was really mad is contradicted by his ability. 
Whatever may be the true explanation, he affords 
at least an interesting study for the student of 
psychology. 

When the general history of internal affairs during 
the reigns of Edward III. and Richard 11. is considered, 
three points at once attract special attention — the 
increased importance of Parliament, the decline of the 
Baronage, and what may be described as the social 
unrest, evidenced by the Wycliffite movement and 
the rising of the Peasants. In the case of Parliament 
the changes were very great and of the last importance. 
In its original state that institution was experimental ; 
it was founded by Edward I., and it is very doubtful 
if that monarch ever realised that he had given to 
England a new institution of very great value. It 
was due to that financial distress, which constantly 
pursued him, that Edward called together the first true 
assembly of the estates of the realm, and its per- 
manency may be justly attributed in great measure 
to its success as a medium of taxation. During the 
rest of the reign of its founder, Parliament was not 
regularly summoned, and, more than once, recourse 
was had to the older councils or to other new 
assemblies. Even the opponents of unrestricted 



48 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

prerogative, were not united in their ideas as to the 
best way in which to attain their objects. There was 
a constant strife between two principles : on the one 
hand there was the scheme for a baronial council of 
government, on the other that of a representative 
assembly of the whole nation. In 1292 the latter 
principle was carried into effect in the " Model " 
Parliament, but nineteen years later the measures of 
the " Lords Ordainers " showed the vitality of the 
earlier ideas of De Montfort. It was only in the 
reign of Edward III. that the permanency of Parlia- 
ment was assured, but during this period the fact 
was established, and the regular summons of the 
estates ceased to be a royal expedient and became a 
popular right. Before the d'eposition of Richard II., 
the right of Parliament to a share in the government 
had been admitted. 

According to the original scheme of Edward I., all 
the three estates were to be represented and no 
division into houses was contemplated, but causes, 
which are unfortunately very obscure, led to a modifi- 
cation of the original plan. The clergy, always 
jealous of their independence, drew apart and 
successfully asserted their right to tax themselves in 
Convocation. As the chief work of the early Parlia- 
ments was to make grants of money, this soon led to 
the entire absence of the proctors of the inferior 
clergy from the assembly of estates, and, although the 
bishops and mitred abbots sat with the temporal 
peers, the perfect representation of Edward I.'s reign 
ceased to be. In acting thus, the Church aimed at 
obtaining a greater freedom, but the eventual result 



PROGRESS OF PARLIAMENT 49 

was a decline in her political influence. It affords an 
interesting example of the general failure to realise 
the importance of the new body. There were two 
bodies left in Parliament, distinguished by the form 
of summons. The greater barons, lay and spiritual, 
were summoned nominatmi, that is, individually ; the 
others were summoned generaliter, by a writ addressed 
to the sheriff of each county. In the second class 
were included the lesser barons, the knights of the 
shire and the burgesses. But in the early Parlia- 
ments there \Vas much division between those 
summoned generaliter. The interests of the com- 
ponent parts were distinct ; the class sympathy of the 
lesser tenants-in-chief drew them towards the peers, 
and the support given by the towns to the royal 
power alienated the knights of the shire. How it 
came to pass that these divisions were healed is not 
certainly known, but the probability is that the 
exclusiveness of the inajores barones repelled the 
advances of the lesser barons and drove them into the 
arms of the burgesses, with whom the knights had 
coalesced already.^ The only certain fact, however, is 
that early in the reign of Edward III. the amalgama- 
tion of all those summoned through the sheriffs was 
an accomplished fact. At the same time, the two 
orders began to sit and to deliberate apart, or in 
other words the two houses of Lords and Commons 
were founded. ' Such a separation had never been 
contemplated by Edward I., but it resulted in a great 
accession of strength. Disputes between the orders 

^ The lesser barons had ceased to sit in their own right, the summons 
to Parliament being gradually confined more and more to the great men. 

5 



50 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

would have been the source of frequent parliamentary 
deadlocks had there been no division, but, being 
separated, they were able to work in harmony, and 
actually there are few instances of a conflict between 
the houses during the whole course of English history. 
This severance was the first advance made in the 
reign of Edward III. 

As it was primarily for financial reasons that Par- 
liament had been called into being, so it was naturally 
in the control of the national purse that its authority 
was first asserted. The French war contributed in 
many ways to the growth of the power of the repre- 
sentative assembly at the expense of the royal 
council, which acted as a ministry, and which had 
hitherto controlled the executive, and, to a great 
extent, the legislature also. Edward was in constant 
need of money, and, although he was perpetually 
resorting to illegal methods of raising taxes, he could 
not afford to quarrel with Parliament. Early in his 
reign, when he attempted to exclude the bishops from 
the House of Lords owing to his quarrel with 
Stratford, he bowed to the will of the two houses 
(1341), and in every case afterwards he ultimately 
gave way. As a result, the Commons established, 
more or less securely, their right to impose all taxa- 
tion ; to control in some measure the administration, 
especially the disposal of the taxes granted ; and to 
give assent to all legislation, though the absence of 
such assent did not as yet necessarily invalidate the 
acts of the council. The chief conflict of Edward's 
reign raged, as was natural, round the question of the 
imposition of taxes. The Commons on five distinct 




MONUMENT OF JOHN, DUKE OF LANCASTER (1340-I399), AND OF HIS 
WIFE CONSTANCE, IN OLD ST. PAUL's. 

Dugdale. 



52 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

occasions subsequently protested against the ille- 
galities of the king, especially in respect of his 
manipulation of the wool trade. Edward made 
agreements with the foreign merchants to grant him 
a percentage on the wool which they bought in 
England, and defended his position by the specious 
argument that such a tax was paid by the foreigners. 
The Commons replied that the traders would merely 
deduct the percentage from the price which they 
would otherwise have paid to the producer ; and 
eventually the king agreed not to make such arrange- 
ments in the future (1363). The assertion of the 
doctrine that taxation could only be imposed by 
Parliament was nothing new, but it became so much 
more decidedly established this time, that the Com- 
mons went so far as to attempt to appropriate 
supplies, granting one subsidy only on condition that 
it should be applied to the French war (1353). 
Another important step was the demand made by 
them to be allowed to audit the royal accounts. One 
such audit was taken, and the necessity for som^e sort 
of supervision was evidenced by the discovery that 
the exchequer officials had estimated the number of 
parishes in England at something like five times the 
real number. In the department of legislation, the 
petitions of either house acquired more and more 
weight and began to resemble more nearly the 
modern " Bills," while the royal ordinances were 
declared to have no effect until they had been 
entered on the rolls of Parliament. Finally, the 
introduction of the practice of impeachment — that is, 
of the Commons accusing unsatisfactory ministers 



PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES 53 

before the Lords — marks the beginning of ministerial 
responsibility. The first instance of this appears at 
the close of the reign, when Lancaster's adherents 
were accused in the Good Parliament. It gave to the 
people for the first time, the power of removing such 
advisers of the Crown as were not acceptable to them, 
and proved in later times to be one of the chief bul- 
warks of popular liberty. In other matters, the voice 
of the Commons was as yet rarely heard. Edward 
III. applied to them more than once for an expression 
of opinion in the French war, but they only interfered 
by request, and once actually declined to tender 
advice at all. It is asserted by some that the king's 
object was merely to shift the responsibility from his 
own shoulders. 

The importance of the last years of Edward III. 
lies in the appearance of the earliest parliamentary 
parties of English history. The very fact that those 
who were contending for the exercise of that authority, 
which the king could no longer wield, sought to 
secure the support of the Commons, is in itself an 
indication of the increased importance of that body. 
The disasters of the French war led to the removal of 
Wykeham ; the Black Prince's fear for the inheritance 
of his son contributed to that of Lancaster, and the 
lack of a prominent leader was the undoing of the 
Good Parliament. But in each one of these changes 
the Commons had their share, and in each they 
asserted their right to correct abuses of administration. 
It was to them that the country looked to punish the 
scandalous corruption of John of Gaunt's clientele, 
and it was by means of a packed House that the duke 
regained his supremacy. 



54 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

It may be suggested that the power of removing 
bad ministers, or of examining their conduct, was the 
necessary outcome of the newly acquired right of con- 
trolhng the national finances. As soon as the Com- 
mons had secured that no taxation should be levied 
without their consent, they naturally proceeded to 
attempt the regulation of the expenditure, and, as the 
ministers were responsible for that expenditure, they 
were necessarily liable to be called to account. Thus 
the right of Impeachment was the almost logical out- 
come of rights previously won, and, in a measure, the 
packing of the Commons by Lancaster is a more 
surprising event than the punishment of his ministry 
by the Good Parliament. It is remarkable that a man 
of the wealth and rank of John of Gaunt, a prince of 
the blood, and incomparably the greatest noble in the 
land, should have been obliged to rely upon a body 
the very permanency of which had been but recently 
established. This fact shows that the eighty-five 
years which had elapsed since the inauguration of 
Edward I.'s experiment had seen great changes in the 
government of England, and it may be regarded as 
the first indication of that power which was gained by 
Parliament under the Lancastrian dynasty. 

At the same time, the fact that John of Gaunt, 
despite his unpopularity, was able by his wealth and 
territorial influence to pack a House of Commons, 
shows the real weakness of that body. The successful 
attack of the Good Parliament upon the Lancastrian 
ministry was due principally to the support of the 
Black Prince. Peter de la Mare, the Speaker of that 
Parliament, was, after all, really the mouthpiece of the 



JOHN OF GAUNT 55 

heir to the throne, and his independence may be 
attributed, without unfairness, to his position as 
seneschal to the Earl of March. Indeed, in every 
case, it was necessary for each party in the Commons 
to secure the countenance of some great noble— the 
representatives of the people could not yet stand 
alone ; and, while there was this dependence upon the 
Baronage, the measures of the Parliament were prac- 
tically dictated by the enemies of true liberty. 
However the nobles might occasionally find that 
their interests coincided with those of the Lower 
House, yet ultimately the government of England 
rested with a single class. It will be seen how this 
necessity of seeking baronial support, this lack of 
ability to lead among the members themselves, caused 
anarchy under the Lancastrians, and contributed to 
the establishment of a strong Monarchy and a tem- 
porary suspension of Parliamentary activity under the 
House of York. 

In one respect, the rule of Lancaster assisted the 
growth of liberty in England. The duke had alienated 
the other nobles, and, either from inclination or neces- 
sity, he filled the council with " small men." His 
chief adherents were Lords Latimer and Nevill, re- 
tainers of his house, and Richard Lyons, a London 
merchant. When the Good Parliament met, no one 
dared openly to attack John of Gaunt, but the Com- 
mons were able to strike at him through his friends. 
Now, it is alleged that Lancaster shared in the 
ill-gotten gains of his subordinates, and, if this is true, 
he was the real culprit, since it was by his connivance 
alone that those gains were amassed, and the fact 



56 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

that he was allowed to escape personally shows the 
impunity which a great noble at that time enjoyed. 
The employment of men of lower rank in high offices 
was therefore advantageous ; if Lancaster had been 
supported by other great barons, he and his ministry 
would have escaped, a fact which he realised when 
too late. As it was. Impeachment was invented and 
used, and the lessons of the Good Parliament were 
remembered in subsequent reigns. Having been able 
once to punish bad ministers, the Commons were 
encouraged to make the attempt again, and hence- 
forward the fear of being called to account acted as 
a salutary check upon the heads of the executive. 

In the early years of Richard II., the privileges of 
the Commons were confirmed and reasserted. The 
control of the exchequer and the auditing of accounts 
were recognised as being within their jurisdiction, 
and the personnel of the council was modified by the 
impeachment of a royal favourite, and by the appoint- 
ment of a commission of reform. The progress of 
the Commons was checked by Richard's assumption 
of power, and in the second part of the reign Parlia- 
ment appears as a mere instrument in the hands of 
the king, used by him against the baronial party. 
But during the half-century from 1350 to 1399, there 
was much constitutional progress. Parliament became 
a permanency ; a return to the old system was no 
longer possible ; while the final act of the reign did 
more than establish a collateral branch of the dynasty 
upon the throne — it also changed the character of the 
Monarchy and introduced a new theory of govern- 
ment 



DECLINE OF THE BARONAGE 57 

The growth of the power of the Commons was 
facihtated by the decline of the Baronage and of the 
Church, and was accompanied by an improvement in 
the position of the lowest class. The circumstances 
of the French war, as has been already pointed out, 
contributed in no small degree to the decline of the 
nobles. The victories of Crecy and Poitiers had 
proved that the heavy-armed cavalry were not invin- 
cible, and that the importance of infantry had been 
underestimated. Henceforth, the bulk of the army 
was no longer composed of feudal lords and their 
retainers. A class of professional soldiers was arising 
throughout Europe, and they were hired in large 
numbers by Edward III. At Navarette the larger 
part of the Black Prince's army was composed of 
mercenaries. And though the consequent taxation 
weighed heavily upon the people, they gained eventu- 
ally by the decline of their natural enemies, and even, 
to a certain extent, rose in importance as a result 
of being employed as soldiers. The help of the 
Baronage was no longer essential in time of war, and 
the king was freed from his dependence upon it. 
Moreover, the war was begun for reasons which did 
not appeal to the nobles, and though its character 
was partially modified in order to gain their support, 
the interest in trade, which had led Edward to attack 
France, was one of the chief features of his internal 
policy. The king devoted great attention to the 
regulation of commerce ; he introduced the first 
manufactures, and he consistently favoured the mer- 
chant classes. Royal patronage was then essential 
to commerce, and it resulted in a growth of trade and 



58 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

of wealth to the cities, which was detrimental to the 
interests of the barons. Year by year money became 
more and more the source of power ; year by year 
the commoners grew richer and the barons relatively 
poorer. 

Moreover, they were affected unfavourably by an 
indirect result of Edward's interest in trade, for as 
commerce increased the navy became more important. 
In any case, the barons would have been useless at 
sea, but the peculiar constitution of the English navy 
caused it to become an engine of popular liberty. To 
explain this, it is necessary to describe in some detail 
its organisation under Edward III. In thd first place, 
it may be premised that there was practically no 
royal navy. The larger vessels — the " cogs " and 
" fluves " — were, perhaps, the property of the govern- 
ment ; but the bulk of the fleet consisted in mer- 
chantmen and fishing boats pressed or chartered for 
each particular occasion. There are constant notices 
of demands being sent to various ports to prepare 
ships to accompany the king, or to operate against 
France and Scotland. They were manned and often 
commanded, in all probability, by their original crews 
and captains, since it is obvious that there was diffi- 
culty in finding sailors, because when the crews of 
certain ships struck for their pay Edward was obliged 
to give way and to pay them in advance. The com- 
mand of the whole navy was generally entrusted to 
two admirals — one having jurisdiction from Bristol 
to the Straits of Dover, the other from the Thames 
to Berwick. Throughout Edward's reign great 
attention was paid to the navy. As already men- 



THE NAVY 59 

tioned, men were often specially summoned to the 
council to advise concerning it. An attempt was 
made to improve the English shipbuilding by imi- 
tating foreign methods, and regulations for settling 
maritime disputes were laid down. But in a way the 
chief importance of this naval activity is that it 
marks an advance in the importance of the non- 
landed population. The crews of the ships were 
drawn from the peasantry ; the admirals even were 
very rarely of higher rank than knights ; and since 
the lesser barons had coalesced with the burgesses, 
the Commons acquired a new weight. They were 
directly connected with the navy, for the towns 
supplied the ships and the shires the officers, and, 
when invasion from France could only be avoided by 
the maintenance of an efficient fleet, the support of 
the class which provided and manned the ships was 
of vital importance to the government. Consequently 
the navy had a great, though indirect, share in the 
promotion of constitutional progress. It is not 
merely accidental that the growth of the Commons 
coincides with increased maritime activity, and in 
this side of the national life the Baronage had no 
share. 

While its importance thus declined in many ways, 
the character of the Baronage was greatly modified 
during this period. In the earlier portion of English 
history the baronial risings had been directed against 
the royal encroachments upon the privileges of an 
order, or, more rarely, the general liberties of the 
country. But after the time of Edward III. they 
were intended to effect a change in the dynasty. 



60 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

And in the policy of that king and of his grand- 
father may be found the causes of this changed 
state of affairs. The legislation of Edward I., by 
preventing sub-infeudation and the granting away 
of lands, tended ultimately to stereotype the existing 
divisions and to perpetuate the great estates. The 
statute of Quia Enip tores tended to discourage further 
partition, in so far as it prevented sub-infeudation ; 
the statute of Mortmain prohibited the granting of 
land to the Church, save under strict regulations ; and 
the clause De .Bonis Condicionalibus allowed the 
entailing of estates. And the vast extent of lands 
which thus accumulated in the power of one man 
made the great barons almost kings in their own 
districts. Edward III. elaborated a course of policy 
which his grandfather had originated, and attempted 
to concentrate these great estates in the hands of 
members of his own family. By grants and by a 
series of judicious marriages his sons were exalted to 
positions of great importance. John of Gaunt affords 
the most striking example. He was created Earl 
of Richmond, and by his marriage with the heiress 
of the house of Lancaster he acquired also the duchy 
of Lancaster and the earldoms of Derby, Leicester, 
and Lincoln. He possessed lands of enormous extent, 
and his wealth was proportionately great ; and his 
power was further increased by the marriage of his 
son to Mary de Bohun, by which Henry acquired 
the earldoms of Hereford, Essex, and Northampton. 
Edward's object in permitting this accumulation of 
lands by one man was to base his throne upon surer 
foundations ; but actually it had exactly the contrary 



APPANAGES 6l 

effect. Hitherto the mutual jealousies of the great 
barons prevented any combination to alter the 
dynasty, and great as might be the leader of the 
baronial party, he was not great enough to stretch 
out his hand 9.nd grasp the sceptre. But henceforth 
the greatest barops were so near the throne that it 
was but a small thing to step upon it, while their 
royal birth gave them even more influence and 
prestige than they would otherwise have had. 
Further, Edward III. deserted the wise policy of 
William I., and permitted the concentration of a 
number of estates in one part of the country in the 
hands of a single man. So at the very time when 
feudalism was dying out the worst features of the 
system were perpetuated — it might almost be said, 
introduced — by the short-sighted and misguided 
policy of the king. The " overmighty subject," 
whose existence was so deplored by the wise Judge 
Fortescue, appears ; and the good accomplished by 
the growth of Parliament was partially neutralised. 
Fortunately for England other changes which took 
place at the same time served to counteract the new 
danger to liberty. 

It has been already shown that the cities grew 
greater during this period ; it remains to describe 
how the condition of the middle and lower classes 
was changed, and changed for the better, and, in this 
connection, to discuss the teaching of Wycliff and the 
Peasants' Revolt. Upon the life of that great man it 
is impossible to dwell, but his work requires atten- 
tion, both on its religious and on its political side. 
And here it is necessary to describe the condition 



62 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

of the Church, in order that WycHff's aims may be 
rightly understood. That body had suffered both 
from external and internal causes. The Papacy, 
which had almost become discredited by the " Baby- 
lonish Captivity," ^ was soon afflicted by the Great 
Schism, and the whole of Christendom was scandalised 
by the appearance of two Vicars of Christ. But still 
more serious was the corruption which characterised 
the clergy, from the court of Rome' to the " mendicant " 
friars. The wealth and greed of the Church was 
patent to all. In vain did the Statute of Mortmain 
prohibit the further granting of lands, save with the 
consent of the superior lord ; the ingenuity of the 
lawyers invented " Uses," ^ and the law remained 
almost a dead letter. An even more crying abuse 
than the vast riches of the Church was the encroach- 
ments of the Papacy. Two important statutes were 
directed to cope with this evil. That of Provisors 
(135 1) forbade the practice of "providing" for 
vacancies, by which the Popes filled English benefices 
with non-resident foreigners and took the first-fruits 
many times from the same benefice by appointing 
men to it before the vacancy actually occurred. The 
Statute of Praemunire (1392) prohibited, under 
severe penalties, the introduction of papal bulls, the 
exercise of legatine authority, and appeals to Rome 
without the royal permission. But, admirable as 

^ That is, the seventy years' residence of the Popes at Avignon, 
instead of at Rome. The Great Schism followed, an anti-Pope being 
elected at Avignon on the death of Gregory XI. (1378). 

^ A practice by which a man left his estates to another for the " Use " 
of a third person, or body ; all the revenues of the lands then went to 
the third party. 




JOHN WYCLIFF (? I324-I384). 

Engraved by E. Einden, from a portrait attributed to Antonio Moro, 
nozu an heirloo?n in the Rectory of Wyclif-on- Tees. 



64 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

these enactments were, they did not cover the whole 
ground of complaint. The abuses of the ecclesiastical 
courts and the reckless profusion of the great clergy 
continued, while the bishops and abbots were occu- 
pied with worldly rather than heavenly matters, and 
the monks and friars forgot their vows of poverty in 
the pursuit of gold. Only the poor parish priests 
performed their real duties ; elsewhere lust, greed, 
and hypocrisy reigned supreme. The literature of 
the period bears eloquent testimony to the universal 
corruption. Chaucer satirised the almoners, sum- 
moners, and pardoners, the greedy hirelings of the 
court of Rome ; he lifted the veil of superstition, and 
openly attacked the vices of the monks and friars, 
who had escaped censure by virtue of the sacred 
office they abused. Langland, in despairing tones, 
described the flight of Virtue from a God-forsaken 
world. But more effective than the satire of Chaucer 
or the laments of Langland was the revolt against 
clerical abuses in the minds of the people. And here 
comes the first part — the religious side — of Wycliff's 
work. Supported by the University of Oxford, where 
he was for a time Master of Balliol College, he began 
to attack the existing corruption. He urged a return 
to apostolic poverty ; he maintained that the clergy 
should be imitators of Christ, that they should 
preach and pray rather than intrigue, that they 
should abandon politics for the work to which they 
were called, and that they should, in short, labour 
in God's vineyard and not in man's. The bishops, 
headed by Courtenay of London, violently opposed 
him, but he received the powerful support of the 



JOHN WYCLIFF 6$ 

Duke of Lancaster and also of many of the barons. 
The latter were possibly attracted by the idea that 
Wycliff proposed a wholesale confiscation of the 
property of the Church, though in justice to the 
reformer it must be mentioned that all he really 
advocated was that the wealth of that body should 
be applied to the purposes for which it was originally 
intended — the furtherance of religion and the relief 
of the poor. But the change which presently took 
place in Wycliff's attitude deprived him of the 
majority of his more powerful friends. Finding 
that it was hopeless to attempt to secure the co- 
operation of the greater clergy in his schemes of 
moral reform, he began to attack the whole position, 
and eventually to assail the dogmas of the Church. 
But the minds of the people were not ready for such 
action. Wycliff lost his popularity and was expelled 
from Lutterworth, while the University, under strong 
compulsion, was induced to denounce his " heresy." 
He was forced to recant in some measure his more 
revolutionary views, and in this way regained his 
living and died there in peace. Yet his work, even 
on the religious side, was not without fruit. He 
completed, in his retirement, that labour of love 
with which his name is indissolubly connected — the 
translation of the Bible, And he sent, for the 
furtherance of his views, his " Poor Priests " over 
the country, who travelled on foot from place to 
place, living rebukes to the rich and arrogant monks 
and friars. They taught the people to read, and 
reading led to thought. The Lollards sprang into 
existence, and they were the pioneers of religious 

6 



66 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

and political progress. On the one hand, the dogmatic 
teaching of the Church was called in question ; on 
the other, the masses ceased to be sheep under the 
hands of baronial butchers, and formed a weak but 
growing popular party. 

Wyclifif, however, was not merely a religious re- 
former, and his political teaching is also important. 
His tract De Doininio Civili embodied his views 
upon temporal matters. Starting with the premise 
that all power is from God, he declared that there 
was no representative of Christ on earth, or rather 
that every man had his particular "dominion," if he 
were in a state of grace, and that those who were 
not in that state could have no true authority. 
Wycliff qualified his statement by adding that in 
this world " God must obey the Devil " ; that the 
powers that be, must be respected, though unrigh- 
teous. But many who heard his original theory 
neglected his qualification, and the ideas, which may 
be ultimately traced to his writings, and which spread 
over the country, were revolutionary and popular. 
They were used by agitators, like the famous John 
Ball, to fan the already existing discontent, and 
they were one of the causes of the Peasants' Revolt. 

But that movement was not merely, or even 
principally, the result of the preaching of political 
theorists ; it .was the outcome of an economic re- 
volution. During the whole of the preceding cen- 
tury, a complete, though gradual, change had been 
taking place in the condition of England. The old 
manorial system was giving way. In earlier times, 
the peasantry had been villeins, more or less attached 



CAUSES OF THE PEASANTS' REVOLT 6/ 

to the soil, treated, to a certain extent, as chattels 
and forced to perform certain definite services in 
return for their plots of ground. But various causes 
had contributed to change all this. The cities 
afforded protection to escaped villeins, who became 
free after an undisputed residence of a year and a 
day within the walls. The tendency to convert 
arable land into pasture rendered the villeins' ser- 
vices less requisite, and when such work was needed, 
the landowners found it more to their interests to 
hire men to perform it, since forced labour was 
naturally unsatisfactory. The French War, too, had 
caused a great influx of wealth into the country in 
the shape of booty, and this gave a further impetus 
to the movement. The practice of commuting 
villein service for a fixed money payment grew 
rapidly, and, owing to the non-enforcement of the laws, 
a class of free labourers arose, without' fixed homes, 
who hired themselves out whef e workers were needed. 
At the same time, the peasants began to desire 
personal liberty. Their prosperity, under the altered 
conditions, made them proud, and their pride took 
the reasonable form of a desire for freedom. Forced 
labour was held to be a degradation, but as yet, it 
was very hard for a villein to escape from it legally. 
The first great cause of the Peasants' Revolt may be 
found in this desire, if the expression may be used, 
to legalise past illegalities ; to make it possible for 
the villein to become a freeman, by other means than 
a flight to a town or to a distant part of the country ; 
and more, to abolish altogether the old system of 
compulsory labour. 



68 THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

The natural economic effect of the Black Death 
was to cause a great scarcity of labour, and the 
survivors attempted to benefit from the national 
calamity by obtaining higher wages. This attempt 
was met by the Statute of Labourers, which fixed 
wages and forbade the servant to ask, or the 
employer to give, higher remuneration. Much 
abuse has been levelled against this enactment, as 
a piece of infamous class legislation, but, though it 
was unpopular and detrimental, it was not intended 
to benefit one section of the community. For it 
provided that the clergy should not, as they had 
tried to do, charge higher fees for burials than they 
had done before the plague, and it was, in short, 
the object of the statute to prevent any one from 
reaping advantage from the misfortunes of the 
cqmmunity. Like most attempts to regulate labour, 
it failed ; the barons, themselves, evaded the law in 
order to save their crops, and its chief effect was to 
increase the discontent of the peasantry. 

Again, there were other contributory causes. The 
central government was weak and there was much 
disorder in the country, where the local magnates 
and their retainers oppressed their lesser neighbours. 
The very prosperity of the villeins was the result of 
actions punishable by law, and men who had grown 
rich despite the government might be expected to 
rise readily against it. Finally, there were a number 
of lesser grievances ; vexatious incidents of the 
manorial systems, which contributed to initiate the 
people still further ; and the heavy taxation, cul- 
minating in the imposition of the poll-tax, seems to 
have been the last incentive to revolt. 



RESULTS OF THE RISING 69 

The upheaval was a great protest on the part of 
a hitherto inarticulate population. It was in every 
way a popular rising. There were no great leaders ; 
Wat Tyler, the most famous, was but the head of a 
section. The demands put forward by the rebels 
show what manner of men they were ; personal 
liberty and the commutation of personal services for 
a fixed rent were the professed objects which they 
had in view. They attacked all who were not with 
them, especially John of Gaunt's friends and the 
clergy, and they destroyed a great deal of useful 
historical material in the shape of manorial rolls. 
The revolt was soon ended, and it appeared to have 
failed completely. The Commons combined with 
the Lords to urge Richard not to fulfil his promises 
to the rebels ; the previously existing sympathy with 
their demands disappeared, and there was no legisla- 
tion in the direction of liberty for the villeins. The 
ultimate extinction of villeinage was due rather to 
gradual concessions than to positive measures, and 
the Rising, by causing a feeling of hatred towards 
the peasantry in the minds of the middle and upper 
classes, may even have tended to perpetuate the very 
evils against which it was a protest. But it was not 
wholly futile. Henceforward, the lords feared the 
villeins, and were careful not to risk a repetition of 
the events of 1381. And the longing for personal 
liberty was not quelled. The peasants adopted an 
attitude of passive resistance and refused to work 
except under compulsion ; and, as they tendered 
money in commutation, the landowners found it 
more to their interest to hire men to do their work. 



JO THE FALL OF THE FEUDAL MONARCHY 

Finally, it was a clear sign that Feudalism, or rather 
the feudal land system, was an anachronism, and it 
is a landmark in the history of its decline and fall. 

It remains to sum up the results of fifty years. 
They are marked by a series of great changes in 
the state of England. The new foreign policy 
necessitated changes in the military and naval 
systems which acted to the disadvantage of the 
Baronage, who were further injured by the increased 
importance of the commercial classes. At the same 
time the Commons, united and in a separate house, 
asserted their independence. As yet they do not 
fill the place of the great nobles ; they still depend 
upon baronial support, and are led by barons, but 
they had obtained a greater weight in the country. 
At least Parliament is a permanency, and the Lower 
House a force which cannot be ignored. And the 
nobles are no longer really feudal, while the character 
of the Monarchy is changed by the transference of 
the crown, through the medium of Parliament, to 
another dynasty. The Church was assailed, and has 
now to choose between reform and the loss of public 
respect. The people have asserted themselves, and 
the lowest class of all has freed itself from the 
onerous burdens which crushed it hitherto. Yet the 
time is one full of danger as well as of hope. The 
nobles are divided already, and a great faction fight 
looms in the distance. For the time the head of one 
faction has acquired the crown, and it is for the new 
dynasty to attempt the solution of three problems. 
It has to decide what is to be the position of Parlia- 
ment and its relation to the executive; it has to 



THE PROBLEMS OF 1 399 



71 



secure its title to the throne ; and it has to cope 
with the danger of the " overmighty subject." The 
history of the next sixty years is an account of the 
success or failure of the attempt of the Lancastrians 
to solve these questions. 




IV 



THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 



(1399-I461) 



The indictment against Richard IL, as drawn up 
by the Parliament, declared that he had forfeited 
the throne through his misgovernment, which had 
rendered him unfit for his position, and though the 
Duke of Lancaster " challenged " the crown and 
asserted his hereditary right, he really ascended the 
throne by the will of Parliament. Asserting its 
ancient privilege as the constitutional heir of the 
Witenagemot and of the National Council, that body 
declared the most suitable member of the royal house 
to be king. The hereditary heir was undoubtedly 
the Earl of March, but he was a child, and the 
representatives of the nation therefore passed him 
over in favour of Henry, a man of full age, of ex- 
perience, and the next prince of the blood. It was in 
vain that the new king asserted his superior right, and 
invented or repeated current fictions to sustain it.^ 

^ Henry alleged the story that Edmund of Lancaster was the elder 

brother of Edward I., and that, as his representative, he had a prior 

claim to the throne. 

72 



THE ACCESSION OF HENRY IP. 73 

The fact remained, that by the will of Parliament the 
succession had been changed, and consequently 
Henry IV. was largely dependent on the same will 
for his maintenance upon the throne. For the same 
reason his position was insecure. While he had been 
the first subject of Richard II., he had enjoyed the 
support of the barons ; but, with the crown, he 
acquired also the hostility of the great nobles. The 
very men who had been his firmest supporters as 
duke were his chief enemies as king. The success 
of his rebellion encouraged others to make similar 
attempts, and his reign is marked by the beginning 
of those risings which culminated in the Wars of the 
Roses, by plots which professedly aimed at his 
deposition in favour of Richard II., which were really 
intended to place the crown once more at the disposal 
of Parliament, each great baron hoping that upon him 
the choice might fall. 

Before Henry had been a year on the throne he 
was called upon to face a plot, formed by the leaders 
of the opposition in the last reign. In his first Parlia- 
ment the acts of the last eleven years were reversed, 
and as a result the earls of Rutland, Salisbury, 
Huntingdon, and Kent were deprived of the more 
exalted titles which had been granted them by 
Richard. They therefore united in a conspiracy for 
the restoration of the deposed king, and prepared to 
kidnap Henry at Windsor. The treachery of Rutland 
betrayed their plans. They were oblig-ed to fall 
back on the West, but the people were against them. 
At Cirencester they were captured by the citizens, 
and the earls of Kent and Salisbury executed. 



74 



THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 




HENRY 



IV 

his 



(1367-1413). 
Tomb, 



Huntingdon was put to 
death in Essex, and 
many of the less impor- 
tant leaders suffered a 
like fate (1400). But 
though this conspiracy 
came to nothing, it 
showed already how in- 
secure was Henry's posi- 
tion, and gave an indi- 
cation of the true feelings 
of the barons. An im- 
mediate result was the 
death of Richard, who 
was almost certainly put 
to death by Henry's 
orders. In order to 
silence all doubts, his 
body was exhibited pub- 
licly in London, but 
there were many who 
believed that he had 
escaped from prison, 
and at a later date a 
pretender appeared at 
the Scottish court, claim- 
ing to be the deposed 
king, really a certain 
Thomas Ward, of Trum- 
pington. 

Soon after the collapse 
of Huntingdon's plot, a 
serious rebellion broke 
out in Wales. Owen 



HENRY^S DIFFICULTIES 75 

Glendower, a descendant of the old native princes, 
had been staunch in his adherence to Richard II., 
and had been taken prisoner with him. After his 
release he had engaged in a lawsuit with Lord Grey 
of Ruthyn, and he attributed the loss of his case 
to the influence of Henry. Accordingly, he levied 
war upon his rival, and having defeated an expedition 
sent against him, proclaimed himself Prince of Wales, 
and maintained his independence in the mountains 
(1401). At the same time Henry became involved in 
hostilities with France and Scotland. Charles VI. 
demanded the restoration of the dowry of his daughter, 
Isabella, the widow of Richard II., and when Henry 
refused to return it, the French attacked Guienne, 
threatened the south coast, and sent help to Glendower. 
In Scotland the Duke of Albany, who was regent for 
his imbecile brother, Robert III., allowed attacks to 
be made upon the English border. Henry retaliated 
by invading the Lothians, but, though he reached 
Leith, the Scotch refused to give him battle, and he 
was soon obliged to retire, owing to lack of supplies. 
In the following year Albany attacked Carlisle. As 
he was returning, the Percies met him at Homildon 
Hill and inflicted a severe defeat upon him, capturing 
his son, the Earl of Plfe, and the Earl of x\ngus, the 
head of the Douglas family (1402). 

But this victory led indirectly to the most serious 
rising with which Henry had to cope. He owed his 
crown in no small degree to the Percies, and they com- 
plained that he had been ungrateful to them. Various 
causes led them to rebel. Glendower had captured 
Mortimer and Ruthyn, and the king, while allowing the 



y6 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

latter to be ransomed, refused to permit the former to 
be released, probably because he was the uncle of the 
Earl of March. As Mortimer was a relative of the 
Percies, this afforded them cause for complaint. 
Again, Henry neglected to discharge a heavy money 
debt which he owed to the Earl of Northumberland, 
and finally, after the battle of Homildon Hill, he took 
the captured Earl of Fife into his own hands, thus 
disappointing the Percies of the large ransom for 
which they had hoped. They accordingly entered 
into negotiations with the Scotch and with Glendower, 
freed Douglas without ransom, and raised a large 
army to depose the king. They were joined by the 
supporters of Richard H., so that all Henry's enemies 
were united in the revolt. But as they moved across 
England to join forces with Glendower, the Percies 
were interrupted by the royal army at Shrewsbury. 
The ensuing battle proved decisive. The younger 
Percy, the famous Henry Hotspur, was killed, and 
all the leaders, except Northumberland, captured 
(1403). Henry advanced northwards with an over- 
whelming force, and the earl presently surrendered. 
The king then triumphed, but he was not strong 
enough to take full vengeance, and was obliged to 
acquiesce in the decision of the House of Lords, that 
Northumberland had not committed treason, and to 
release him on payment of a fine. 

Another rebellion followed shortly afterwards. 
Taking advantage of Henry's absence in the West, 
Percy again rose, and was joined by Mowbray and 
by Scrope, Archbishop of York. The return of the 
King ended the rising. Northumberland fled to 



QUARREL WITH FRANCE yy 

Scotland, and his two friends were executed (1405). 
Still Henry's position was very insecure, and only a 
series of fortunate accidents gave him peace. In the 
first place, after a naval victory off Portland had 
freed him from the immediate fear of invasion from 
France, the outbreak of civil war in that country 
rendered it powerless. In the second place, the 
capture of James, the heir to the throne of Scotland, 
on his way to France gave him a useful hostage. 
The prince was kept in honourable captivity, and, as 
Henry had the Earl of Fife also in his hands, he 
secured the neutrality of both parties in that king- 
dom. The capture and death of Northumberland 
removed the last of his enemies (1408), and the 
closing years of his reign were peaceful. He con- 
cluded marriage alliances with Castile, Navarre, and 
Aragon, as well as with the Empire and Scandinavia, 
and this raised the reputation of his family.^ The 
Church, as a whole, and the Commons gave him 
support at home, and Glendower was confined to 
Wales, where he maintained a precarious inde- 
pendence until his death. 

He was, therefore, able to turn his attention to 
French affairs. Charles VI. had taken advantage 
of Henry's difficulties to encourage the revolt of 
Guienne, where the people had refused to recognise 
the deposition of Richard. And the French had 
also assisted Glendower's rebellion and quarrelled 
with the English concerning Isabella. An invasion 

* One of his sisters was Queen of Castile, another Queen of Aragon. 
Henry married a princess of Navarre ; one of his daughters married 
the King of Denmark, and another the son of the Emperor. 



78 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

of England was proposed, and would have been 
carried out had not the imbecility of Charles VI. led 
to internal strife. But the disputes of the dukes of 
Burgundy and Orleans weakened France, and Henry 
perpetuated this condition of affairs by siding now 
with one, now with the other. When the murder 
of the Duke of Orleans led to open civil war, the 
Burgundians were supported by Henry, and by this 
means won the battle of St. Cloud (141 1). For a time 
the Orleanists were powerless, and agreed to cede 
all Guienne to England as a price of help. Henry 
prepared to take possession of the provinces, but a 
temporary understanding was effected between the 
rival parties, and they united to oppose England. 
War broke out between the two countries. The 
Duke of Clarence overran Tourraine and Maine, 
and, having been bought off by the people of those 
provinces, was proceeding to reduce Guienne, when 
Henry IV. died. 

Like most kings who had succeeded to the throne 
in defiance of hereditary right, Henry was an able 
ruler. Not only did he overcome opposition at home, 
but he also showed the appreciation of England's 
true interests in his foreign policy. By alternately 
assisting both parties, he kept France in a state of 
weakness, and thus attained all Edward III.'s objects 
without risking a war. But his son deserted this 
cautious policy in favour of a more attractive, but 
less politic, course. To his advice the dispatch of 
an army at the close of the reign may be fairly 
attributed, and very soon after his accession Henry 
V, committed a grave blunder by renewing the 



RENEWAL OF THE HUNDRED VEARS' WAR 79 

Hundred Years' War and reviving the claim to the 
French throne. His reasons for doing so were com- 
plex, and it is important to notice them, since they 
showed to a certain extent a reactionary spirit. It 
has been pointed out that Edward HI. fought really 
for English trade ; that his other reasons for war 
were subsidiary. But Henry V. was led to embark 
upon vast projects of conquest by a mistaken political 
wisdom. He hoped to turn the attention of the 
people from his own weak title by satiating them 
with success in war, to secure his dynasty by 
covering it with military glory, to employ the rest- 
less nobles in foreign instead of in domestic strife, 
to turn the attention of his subjects from internal 
affairs, and to solve the problems of the time by 
postponing their consideration. Indeed, his course 
was altogether unsound. It could only succeed as 
long as the war was a victorious one. Defeat would 
lead to a recrudescence of existing difficulties, and in 
a more acute form, and such a result was inevitable. 
The conquest of France was a chimerical project, 
impossible of attainment, and the attempt of Henry 
V. only postponed the crisis in England. It led to 
the disorder of his son's reign, to the Wars of the 
Roses, and to the consolidation of the very country 
which it had been proposed to conquer. 

And yet the war began with fair hopes of success. 
Indeed, never has the reduction of a country seemed 
more possible. Charles VI. dragged out his exist- 
ence at Paris, still nominally king of France, but 
really a card-playing imbecile, occasionally violent, 
and at rare intervals comparatively sane. The right 



8o THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

to rule in his name was fiercely disputed between 
the Burgundians and the Armagnacs — the old party 
of Orleans. Paris was the scene of constant riots, 
and open war existed between the rivals. Divided 
against itself, France was, indeed, in no condition to 
resist the English, and Henry had good cause to 
hope that he would succeed where Edward IIP. had 
failed. He won over the Duke of Burgundy to a 
neutral attitude, and then proceeded to treat with 
the temporary ruler of France, the Duke of Guienne, 
the king's eldest son. The terms proposed were such 
that their rejection was inevitable. Henry demanded 
the absolute cession of all the territory acquired by 
Edward HI. at the treaty of Bretigni, with the 
addition of Normandy, Maine, Tourraine, Anjou, and 
Picardy, and the homage of Brittany and Flanders, 
and further claimed the balance of John's ransom 
and the hand of Catherine, daughter of Charles VI., 
with a large dowry. As he began at the same time 
to raise a fleet and army, and even to embark his 
troops, it is clear that he was insincere even in these 
outrageous proposals, and that they were merely 
put forward that their rejection might give an excuse 
for attack. As a matter of fact, negotiations were 
still nominally pending when he sailed, although his 
departure had been hindered. For, upon the eve of 
embarkation, he discovered a serious conspiracy, 
headed by the Earl of Cambridge, brother of the 
Duke of York, and husband of Anne Mortimer, sister 
of the Earl of March, and supported by Lord Scrope 
and Sir Thomas Grey. They proposed to restore 
Richard H., or, if he were dead, to place March upon 



AGINCOURT 8 1 

the throne, and so for the first time the superior 
hereditary claim of the Mortimers was brought 
forward. The three leaders were executed, and the 
plot thus ended, but its existence showed the un- 
settled condition of the country, and indicated the 
probable course of future opposition (141 5). 

For the present, however, the danger was averted, 
and Henry at once sailed to France, where he laid 
siege to Harfleur. The city made a determined 
defence, and its reduction cost the invaders the 
flower of their army. Too weak to advance into 
France and unable to return to England directly, 
owing to lack of transports, the English were 
compelled to march to Calais, where the necessary 
ships were awaiting them. But by adopting this 
course they invited attack. At Agincourt they were 
intercepted by a large army under the Constable 
D'Albret, and were only saved from certain destruc- 
tion by the incompetence and rashness of the French 
general. He confined his army in a narrow plain, 
and the very numbers of the French made for their 
defeat. The first line was thrown into disorder by 
the English archers, the second was too near to allow 
the fugitives to escape, and in a short time the 
whole army was in disorder. Henry gained an 
overwhelming victory, and the Armagnacs were 
practically annihilated, all their leaders being killed 
or captured (141 5). The English were again unable 
to follow up their success, and, marching to Calais, 
crossed to their own land. 

Even this great national disaster did not put an 
end to the discord in France. The Dauphin created 

7 



82 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

the Count of Armagnac Constable, and thus showed 
that he was not prepared to make terms with the 
Burgundians. That party maintained its friendship 
with the Enghsh, so that the whole strength of 
France could not be exerted. And very soon the 
quarrel in France became more acute. The death of 
his two elder brothers made Charles, the king's third 
son, heir to the throne, and he was wholly in the 
interests of Armagnac. The queen, who attempted 
to use her position to influence her son, was expelled 
from Paris, and, to free themselves from all oppo- 
sition in the city, the ruling party inaugurated a 
reign of terror. Without the city walls lay the Duke 
of Burgundy, who now received the support of the 
queen, and who awaited an opportunity to make 
himself master of the capital. Meanwhile the 
English had remained on the defensive, but now, 
after two years of comparative inaction, Henry again 
invaded France. His position was strengthened by 
the moral support of the Emperor Sigismund, who, 
after failing to mediate, had openly joined the 
English. There was no organised opposition to 
Henry's progress, and place after place was captured. 
At last, while the Burgundians entered Paris and 
massacred the Armagnacs, the English took Rouen 
and began to advance upon the capital (14 19). 
The pressing danger induced the Dauphin to treat 
with the Duke of Burgundy, an apparent reconcilia- 
tion was effected, but the surviving Armagnacs were 
not prepared to sacrifice their power and succeeded 
in persuading the prince to a step which perpetuated 
the quarrel. At a private interview on the bridge of 




Phot6\ \_Etnery Walker. 

KING HENRY YI. (142I-I471). 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 



84 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

Montereau the duke was assassinated in the presence 
of Charles and with his consent (141 9). The new 
duke at once threw himself into the arms of the 
English, all thoughts of reconciliation were aban- 
doned, and Henry acquired the whole-hearted support 
of the queen, the Burgundians, and the citizens of 
Paris. Negotiations for a definite peace were opened, 
and in less than a year after the murder of the duke 
the Treaty of Troyes was signed. By it Henry was 
recognised as heir to the French throne and as 
regent during Charles VI. 's lifetime. He was to 
marry Catherine, the crowns of the two countries 
were to be permanently united, and both parties 
were to unite in reducing the rest of France (1420). 
But the patriotism of the French nation revolted 
against this disgraceful agreement. The people 
rallied round the Dauphin and a new vigour 
appeared in his councils. A Castilian fleet won a 
naval victory in the Channel and brought Scotch 
auxiliaries to the help of Charles, and while Henry 
was celebrating his marriage in England, his brother, 
the Duke of Clarence, was defeated and slain at 
Beauge (142 1). The progress of the French was 
checked by the return of the English king and they 
were slowly pressed south of the Loire. But in the 
midst of his success Henry V. was attacked by fever, 
his health, never good, had been shattered by his 
campaigns, and he died, leaving a son of nine months 
old to succeed him (1422). Only a few days after- 
wards Charles VI. died also, and, in accordance with 
the treaty of Troyes, Henry VI. was proclaimed 
king of France as well as of England. At the 



REGENCY OF BEDFORD $5 

same time the Dauphin was crowned at Poitiers as 
Charles VII. 

Henry V., on his deathbed, had named his two 
brothers, the dukes of Bedford and Gloucester, as 
regents for his son — the former to command in 
France, the latter in England. But the council 
denied the right of the king to regulate the govern- 
ment and modified the arrangements considerably. 
Bedford was declared to be regent and entrusted 
with the duty of reducing the rest of France to 
submission, while Gloucester was appointed " Pro- 
tector and Defensor " of England in his brother's 
absence, though with such limitations to his authority 
that he was little more than the executive officer of 
the Council. Bedford at once set himself to complete 
the work of Henry V. He strengthened the all- 
important alliance with Burgundy by marrying the 
duke's sister, Anne ; while Brittany was also brought 
into the league by another marriage, that of Margaret 
of Burgundy to Arthur, brother of the Duke of 
Brittany. And, as the Scottish auxiliaries had 
formed the best part of the French armies, he 
attempted to secure the northern kingdom by the 
release of James, on condition that he would prevent 
his subjects from assisting Charles VII. Having 
thus done his utmost to ensure success, Bedford 
crossed to France and began to reduce that country. 
At Verneuil (1424) he gained a great victory and 
not only checked the French, who had been making 
some progress, but drove them out of all the territory 
north of the Loire. This success, however, marked 
practically the culminating point of the English 



S6 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

good fortune, for soon afterwards the tide began to 
turn. 

It was the Duke of Gloucester who dealt the first 
blow to the cause of his country. He set himself to 
secure the government of England and was supported 
by part of the Council, while Cardinal Beaufort, his 
uncle, led the opposition to him. Their quarrels 
naturally weakened the home government at a time 
when Bedford needed all the support he could get, 
and presently Gloucester did an even greater injury 
to his brother. Jacqueline of Hainault was the wife 
of a relative of the Duke of Burgundy and deserted 
him. She took refuge in England, where Gloucester 
took up her cause, married her and laid claim to 
her inheritance. He entered the Low Countries to 
secure his title, and, though he was defeated, the 
Duke of Burgundy was naturally angry at the attack 
upon his kinsman. It was only with great difficulty 
that Bedford prevented the rupture of the Burgundian 
alliance ; as it was the ties between England and 
Burgundy were weakened, though the duke's forces 
united with the English in forming the siege of 
Orleans (1428). 

That city was the key to Southern France and 
Charles VII. strained every nerve to retain it. But 
the besiegers made equally determined efforts. A 
large convoy was captured at Rouvray — in the battle 
of the Herrings (1429); the fall of Orleans seemed 
to be certain, and the French king began to prepare 
to abandon the contest. At this critical juncture 
there appeared at his court a maiden of Lorraine, 
who gave out that she was sent by Heaven to restore 



JOAN OF ARC Sy 

the fortunes of her country. This was Joan of Arc, 
whose strange career forms one of the most remark- 
able episodes of the period. It is idle to speculate as 
to whether she was really convinced of the genuine- 
ness of her mission or was a patriotic impostor. In 
any case the superstition of the age enabled her 
to succeed. New vigour appeared in the French 
councils; the king was roused from his apathy; 
the soldiers no longer regarded the English as 
invincible. Orleans was relieved ; the invaders were 
slowly driven back ; and Charles was crowned at 
Rheims. Bedford found himself unable even to 
retain what he had won, and though Joan w^as 
captured the effect of her work remained. She was 
burnt as a witch at Rouen, a crime which did no 
good to the English cause. Bedford caused Henry 
to be crowtied at Paris, but the weakness of his 
position was evident from the haste with which the 
young king was sent back to England. On every 
side, indeed, the French made progress, and the 
death of Anne of Burgundy led to a serious quarrel 
between the allies. Bedford, hoping to strengthen 
his cause, married Jacquetta of Luxemburg (1432), 
but he neglected to ask for the leave of the Duke of 
Burgundy, her overlord, who accordingly began to 
show an inclination to make peace with Charles VII. 
Meanwhile, the internal dissensions of England 
increased, and the presence of Bedford was necessary 
to preserve order. So desperate was his position 
that he opened negotiations ; a great congress was 
held at Arras, where there appeared representatives 
from nearly every state in Europe (1435). But 



88 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

Gloucester had managed to form a war party in 
England in opposition to his brother, and mainly 
through his influence the congress came to nothing. 
Just afterwards Bedford died and Burgundy made 
peace with France. 

Thenceforward, the war was merely a series of 
English disasters. The country was exhausted and 
there was no one capable of filling the duke's place. 
The peace party at last concluded a marriage between 
Henry and Margaret of Anjou ; but the terms were 
disgraceful for England and' only purchased a brief 
truce. The battle of Formigny (1450) led to the loss 
of Northern France and three years later the last 
English army was defeated at Castillon. All 
Guienne was reconquered by the French and the 
state of England prevented .any attempt to recover 
it. Thus, after about a century of intermittent 
warfare, the English attempt to found a continental 
monarchy ended in disaster, and Calais alone 
remained as a result of such a vast expenditure of 
blood and treasure. 

It has already been pointed out that the rivalry at 
home between Gloucester and Beaufort was a con- 
stant source of weakness to Bedford and contributed 
to the failure of the attempt to conquer France. 
When the duke died, the leadership of the moderate 
party — which desired any honourable peace — passed 
nominally to the Cardinal, but practically to 
De la Pole, Earl of Suffolk. It was he who nego- 
tiated the Treaty of Tours (1445), by which Henry 
married Margaret, and, as a- result, he was violently 
attacked by Gloucester. Serious charges were 



LANCASTRIANS AND YORKISTS 89 

brought against him, but before they could be 
investigated both Gloucester and Beaufort died 
(1447). The character of the two parties was now 
greatly changed. The leadership of the opposition 
passed to Richard, Duke of York, the representative 
of the Mortimer family and heir to the throne ; while 
the government relied upon the Beauforts, headed by 
the Duke of Somerset, and the new nobility, repre- 
sented by Suffolk. In fact, the parties of the Wars 
of the Roses were definitely formed, and the character 
of each may be sketched at this point. The strength 
of the Lancastrians lay in the North and West, where 
they could reckon upon the Percies, the Beauforts, 
and the Ormonds. They were also supported by the 
branches of the royal house, the Duke of Buckingham 
and the Earl of Stafford, and by the Church. The 
Yorkists relied upon the families of Neville and 
Mowbray. The former house included the earls of 
Warwick, Salisbury, and Westm.oreland ; and they 
joined the opposition partly because the Duke of 
York had married a Neville, partly because they 
were hereditary enemies of the Percies. The 
Mowbrays were descendants of the rival of 
Henry IV., and were represented by the Duke of 
Norfolk. It was in the South and Midlands that the 
strength of the Yorkists lay, and as they stood 
forward as the champions of reform, they enjoyed 
the support of the towns. But the real cause of 
the quarrel was dynastic rivalry. The Lancastrians 
inherited the enmities of Richard II., and the 
Yorkists were the successors of the Lords Appellant. 
'Whatever might be the ostensible policy of either 



90 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

party, the struggle was really the same as that which 
had placed Henry IV. on the throne ; it was a 
faction fight between two branches of the royal house. 

The efforts of the opposition were directed first of 
all against Suffolk, who was duly impeached (1450). 
To save his friend's life, Henry banished him, but, on 
on his way to France, the minister was intercepted 
and executed, no doubt at the instigation of York. 
Somerset took the place of De la Pole, but his 
government was equally unpopular. The Duke of 
York had been sent away to Ireland to restore order 
in that country, and was thus condemned to a kind 
of honourable banishment ; but when the news of the 
battle of Formigny arrived, the men of Kent rose 
under Jack Cade, and demanded the dismissal of 
Somerset and the return of York. The outbreak had 
hardly been quelled, when the duke appeared to urge 
the same demands in person. Taking advantage 
of Henry's absence in the West, he moved upon 
London ; was deceived by the king and disbanded 
his forces, only to find that Somerset remained in 
favour. For a while peace was procured, but the 
country was in a condition of anarchy. The members 
of the two parties engaged in private wars, and it 
was obvious that an open attack upon the king was 
merely postponed. 

One cause which led the Duke of York to refrain 
from an open attack upon Henry was the fact that 
he was heir to the throne, but this was presently 
removed by the birth of a Prince of Wales. Almost 
at the same time the king went out of his mind, and 
the duke was made Protector. His triumph now 








V .^ 

CO g 



T 


t>t 


^ 


^ 


'■/' 








U 


t-1 


^ 


^ 


C4 


L.*:^ 


< 


^ 






ta 


^ 


o 












l_{ 


'ts* 


erf 


1^ 


<!' 


§2 


W 


^ 










H 


S 


1-1 


^ 






> 




W 


.Oj 


<^ 


■« 


Q 


g 


erf 


<?> 




^ 


u 





9*2 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

seemed to be complete ; but just as he was preparing 
to remove his rivals, Henry recovered. Somerset was 
restored to favour and York took up arms, giving out 
that he desired to save the king from his evil advisers. 
The first battle of the Wars of the Roses was fought 
at St. Alban's ; the Lancastrians were totally defeated, 
Somerset was killed, and Henry taken prisoner 
(1455). Another short term of office as Protector 
was enjoyed by York, but the king again recovered, 
and the hollow reconciliation between the parties was 
soon broken. The opposition leaders retired from 
court and the government was entrusted to the 
queen and to the new Duke of Somerset. An 
attempt to punish Warwick for an act of piracy, 
which he had committed as Governor of Calais, led 
to the renewal of open war. The Lancastrians were 
defeated at Bloreheath, but the bulk of the victorious 
army deserted (1459). The Yorkist leaders fled, and 
were declared guilty of high treason in their absence. 
The triumph of Somerset was short. The Earl of 
Warwick gathered a new army at Calais ; the Duke 
of York returned from Ireland. At the battle of 
Northampton the royalists were overwhelmed and 
the king again taken prisoner (1460). London was 
soon afterwards occupied by the Yorkists, and the 
duke now took the decisive step by laying claim to 
the throne. But Parliament was not prepared to 
depose Henry and a compromise was reached, by 
which the duke was recognised as heir and guaranteed 
the succession on the death of the present king. 
Margaret, however, would not allow her son to be 
disinherited ; she raised an army in the north, and 



ACCESSION OF EDWARD IV. 93 

at Wakefield the Duke of York was defeated and 
slain (1460). At St. Alban's she gained a second 
victory and recaptured her husband, but meanwhile 
the new Duke of York, having crushed the Lan- 
castrians in the West at Mortimer's Cross, had 
occupied the capital and been proclaimed king as 
Edward IV. Margaret's army was undisciplined, and 
she could not prevent a retreat ; Edward pursued 
her, and at Towton gained a decisive victory. 
Henry and his wife fled to Scotland, and, though 
the Civil War was not quite over, the Lancastrian 
monarchy came to an end (1461). 

The accession of the House of York marks the 
failure of that constitutional experiment which forms 
the central feature of the internal history of the period 
immediately following on the deposition of Richard 
H. It has been already pointed out that Henry IV. 
owed his crown to Parliament, and the house of 
Lancaster was obliged to rely mainly upon the sup- 
port of that body. As a natural result they ruled 
constitutionally, while the Commons secured the 
position to which they had already attained, and 
acquired fresh concessions from the necessities of the 
Crown. While, on the one hand, the king no longer 
attempted to raise illegal taxes, the Commons, on the 
other, appointed officers to control the expenditure 
and to audit the accounts. They secured the appro- 
priation of supplies and insisted upon the redress of 
grievances being the preliminary of a grant, making 
the question of supply the last business of the session. 
And they gained the right to be the sole originators 
of money bills, although the principle was not per- 



94 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

haps really embodied in the Constitution until a later 
date. The privilege of freedom of speech was 
acknowledged by the consent of Henry IV. to the 
reversal of the judgment against Sir Thomas Haxey, 
who had been imprisoned in the preceding reign for 
a speech made in the Commons. And in addition 
other privileges were asserted ; the electoral body 
was defined, being limited for thq, first time under 
Henry VI. to a forty-shilling franchise in the counties, 
with residence both in counties and boroughs, and 
questions of public policy were discussed, the Treaty 
of Troyes being submitted to Parliament. In view 
of the increased importance of the Commons, the 
government sought to influence the elections and to 
increase the royal party by securing the choice of 
lawyers who always favoured the prerogative, but 
the Commons resisted both attempts, and, although 
packed houses became frequent, the " Unlearned 
Parliament" (1404) shows that the introduction of 
professional legists was successfully opposed. Finally, 
petitions by both Houses took the character of 
modern " bills " and became law on receiving the 
royal assent. 

But, unfortunately for the country, the Commons 
were not content with absorbing the legislative power, 
they began to attempt to control the executive also. 
Already, by petition or by impeachment, they had 
procured the removal of ministers, and such power 
served as an useful check upon maladministration. 
When, however, they went further the results were 
disastrous for the country and for themselves. By 
their petition of Thirty-one Articles, in the reign of 



WEAKENING OF THE EXECUTIVE 95 

Henry IV. (1406), they severely limited the preroga- 
tive. A council was, in accordance with this petition, 
to be established, responsible to Parliament, to super- 
vise the government when the Houses were not 
sitting, and to be practically an executive committee. 
Such a measure had no bad results as long as the 
king was a man, but with the minority of Henry VI. 
it led to complete disorder. Jealous of their newly 
won greatness, Parliament refused to entrust large 
powers to the Regent and still less to the Protector 
and Deferfeor. Consequently the executive was 
weakened, and at the very time when a strong hand 
was most needed. It has been seen how the divisions 
in the Council weakened Bedford in France, and at 
home it led to that state of disorder which is depicted 
in the " Paston Letters." In the early years ot 
Henry VI. Parliament attained to a position of 
importance, which it did not reach again until two 
hundred years later or more. But its growth was 
premature ; it was incapable of organising the strong 
government which was required, and its failure led 
to its almost total extinction for a time. During the 
Wars of the Roses it sank to be a mere instrument in 
the hands of the predominant party ; its functions 
were usurped by the Council, and it was merely used 
to give a show of legality to the measures of the rival 
leaders. In short, Parliament proved td be incapable 
of controlling the " overmighty subjects " ; to be unfit 
to rule the country, and to be useful merely as a 
legislative and as an advisory body. But, at the 
same time, the very fact that it was not wholly 
ignored shows that its importance was recognised 



96 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT 

and that its permanent existence was assured. In 
1461 it was weaker than in 1399, because it had 
reached a certain point of importance and then 
declined, and had it not been for external circum- 
stances it might have disappeared. As it was it 
lived ; its independence had vanished, but there was 
the possibility of recovery. 

The division among the nobles was the salvation 
of Parliament. Had the Baronage been united, it is 
probable that the course of English history would 
have been similar to that of France ; the destruction 
of popular institutions being followed by a reaction 
in favour of the Monarchy and the establishment of a 
despotism based on the people. But, as it was, each 
party in the Baronage found the support, voluntary 
or involuntary, of Parliament, useful in the quarrel, 
and thus Yorkists and Lancastrians alike legalised 
their acts through the medium of the Commons. In 
more ways than one, the Wars of the Roses were a 
blessing in disguise. Not only did the quarrel pre- 
serve the existence of Parliament, but it also 
destroyed the nobles. In the battles of the civil war, 
and in the wholesale executions which followed the 
temporary triumph of either party, the Baronage was 
nearly exterminated. The " overmighty subjects " 
ceased to be, and a strong central government 
became possible once more. At the same time, 
England learnt the evils of a weak executive, and 
the old jealousy between the two branches of the 
government died out, not to be revived until the 
Commons were able to take the control of both into 
their own hands with reasonable hopes of success. 



CONDITION OF THE CHURCH 97 

With the Baronage fell the Church as a political 
power in the country. She still supplied ministers, 
and her wealth remained great, but her influence 
was gone ; the Church ceased to be the leader and 
instructress of the people. Yet, on the surface, her 
position was stronger than ever. The Lancastrians 
had been obliged to lean upon the clergy as well as 
upon Parliament, and the might of royal authority 
had been exerted against the enemies of the Church. 
The first persecuting statute of English history, the 
" De Heretico Comburrendo " (1401), had been 
enacted against the Lollards, and that party, though 
it continued to exist, ceased to be dangerous. 
Abroad, the Emperor Sigismund had assembled the 
Council of Constance where the " Great Schism " was 
at last healed and the unity of the Church restored, 
while the heretics of Bohemia suffered the same fate 
as their brethren in England. Everywhere the posi- 
tion of the Church was apparently improved, and 
the attacks upon her ceased. But this was merely 
a false peace ; the calm before a greater storm. It 
gave her a last chance to reform herself and she 
lost it. The great ecclesiastics had learnt nothing ; 
their vices and corruption increased ; the respect of 
mankind was forfeited and no effort was made to 
regain it. Already the Renaissance had begun in 
Italy, accompanied by an open contempt for religion. 
While the English were being defeated in Guienne, 
the last Emperor of the East Romans fell in the 
great breach of the wall of Constantinople ; and 
while Lancastrians and Yorkists were fighting, the 
fugitive Greeks were sowing the seeds of the New 

8 



98 THE CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERIMENT ■ 

Learning in Western Europe, As yet, England 
remained in darkness, but the dawn was near ; a 
dawn which was to prove a rude awakening for the 
spiritual leaders of the country, as yet absorbed in 
the pursuit of politics or pleasure. Having neglected 
the warning supplied by the Lollard movement, the 
Church had pronounced her own doom. 

Despite the existence of much misery, the general 
condition of the people improved during the Lan- 
castrian period. The evils with which they had to 
contend were great. In the weakness of the central 
power, the nobles found their opportunity. Private 
wars were frequent, especially in the north and west. 
The practice of " Maintenance " arose, by which the 
great lords " maintained " their clients in the courts 
of law, by terrorising judge and jury. There was no 
power capable of punishing them, and it was hope- 
less to expect justice against a retainer of a powerful 
baron. At the same time, the disorder of the country 
led to famine and pestilence ; commerce was inter- 
rupted by the growth of piracy, the English navy was 
neglected, and the coasts of Ireland and England 
were ravaged by pirate fleets. But there were signs 
of improvement. Villeinage, already declining, 
practically disappeared ; the towns were usually 
secure from the nobles, and, on the whole, the people 
benefited from the civil war, in which, generally 
speaking, they were not involved and by which they 
were, to a certain extent, freed from oppression. The 
Commons ceased to be drawn from the retainers of 
the nobles, and came to represent the people more 
closely. Moreover, although the New Learning had 



THE LANCASTRIAN PERIOD 99 

not as yet spread to England, the two great 
Universities grew in importance and new colleges 
were founded, with the result that the standard of 
education rose and that the people began to be more 
qualified to assert their importance. It may be said 
that the evils of the time were transitory in their 
nature, while the improvements in the general condi- 
tions of life were permanent and important. 

To review the period, it may be said that it was 
not really one of political progress. The constitu- 
tional rule of the Lancastrians ended in failure and 
the premature growth of Parliament was followed by 
a reaction. The " overmighty subjects " proved too 
strong for the Crown and the dynasty was again 
changed. But in one respect there was advance, 
although unconscious. The reactionary foreign policy 
of Henry V. ended in defeat, and the English, 
expelled from the Continent, were forced to turn to 
the sea. The period, which follows, is one of unrest. 
The Yorkists, like the Lancastrians, fail to secure 
their throne and the crown passes away to a new 
royal house. The history of the next twenty- five 
years is the history of the events which lead up to 
the establishment of the Tudor Monarchy. 



1_. »^. w'. 



V 



THE HOUSE OF YORK 



(1461-1485) 



The apparent result of the battle of Towton was 
to secure Edward IV. on the throne, and indeed for 
a time his position was unassailable. A packed 
parliament confirmed his title, declared the Lan- 
castrian kings to have been usurpers, and annulled 
their acts. The whole country acknowledged the 
new monarch, and even such strong supporters of 
the late dynasty as the Percies and Somerset made 
their submission. These nobles, indeed, presently 
rebelled and raised the north, with the help of Queen 
Margaret and some French auxiliaries, but they were 
defeated by Lord Montague at Hedgely Moor and 
Hexham ; and their death, after the latter battle, 
was an advantage for the king (1464). Shortly 
afterwards, Henry VL was captured and imprisoned 
in the Tower, while Margaret took refuge at the 
court of Louis XL The Lancastrian party, for a 
time, disappeared, and it seemed that the house of 
York was firmly established. But there was one 



WAIilV/CA' THE KINGMAKER lOI 

great source of weakne3s to Edward ; his power 
rested upon the goodwill of one great family, and 
it might be said that he ruled by leave of the Earl 
of Warwick. 

The epithet of " The Kingmaker " describes the 
share which that great baron had had in raising 
the house of York to the throne. Richard Neville, 
Indeed, held a position which enabled him to ensure 
the success of whatever party he supported. He was 
himself by inheritance Earl of Salisbury, and by 
marriage Earl of Warwick also. He held vast estates 
in the North, in the Midlands, and in the South, and, 
in addition, was Governor of Calais and Warden of 
the Western Marches of Scotland. From his pri- 
vate lands and his public employments, he derived 
enormous wealth ; his retainers were numbered by 
thousands, and his open-handed generosity and 
hospitality made him a great popular favourite. In 
addition to all this, he was head of the Nevilles and 
connected with all the chief families of England. 
One of his brothers, Lord Montague, already a 
powerful noble, received the lands of the Percies, 
with the earldom of Northumberland, after the 
battle of Hexham. His other brother was Arch- 
bishop of York and Chancellor. The earls of 
Arundel, Oxford, and Worcester had married his 
sisters, and Lord Stanley, the representative of the 
newer nobility, was another brother-in-law. This 
family had been the backbone of the Yorkist party ; 
and Warwick had, by his influence and by his 
generalship, been the chief factor in the success of 
that house. He had advised the Duke of York to 



I02 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

claim the throne, and had won the battle of North- 
ampton. The accession of Edward IV. appeared 
to consolidate his position, and his power was 
greater than had ever been wielded before by any 
subject ; if he was the " last of the barons," he was 
also the greatest. 

But the new kincf either from carelessness or 
from design, quickly irritated his powerful subject. 
Warwick urged him to marry a foreign princess in 
order to secure his family by an alliance with another 
reigning house, but Edward disregarded this counsel, 
and instead took a step which could hardly fail to anger 
not only the Nevilles, but also many other Yorkists. 
This step was his marriage with Elizabeth Woodville 
(1465). She was the widow of Sir John Grey, the 
daughter of Lord Rivers by the Dowager Duchess of 
Bedford, and was thus a member of a thoroughly 
Lancastrian family. Such a marriage was almost 
certain to cause much opposition, but Edward's 
next acts served to anger his own supporters still 
more. He showered estates and titles upon the new 
queen's family, even depriving his tried friends of 
their offices for the benefit of the renegade Lancas- 
trians. For a while the Nevilles continued to support 
the king, but to this marriage must be traced the 
beginning of a rupture which ended in the battle of 
Barnet. 

The second cause of quarrel was a difference in 
foreign policy. Louis XI. of France was now en- 
gaged in his struggle with the house of Burgundy, 
and in this dispute Warwick and Edward took 
different sides. The king, probably owing to his 




Photo] 



KING EDWARD IV. (1442-I483). 

From a fainting in the Natiotial Portrait Gallery. 



\_Eniery Walker. 



104 ^^^ HOUSE OF YORK 

interests in commerce, was in favour of an alliance 
with the duke ; the earl aimed at a close union 
with the French. Soon after his wedding, Edward 
apparently gave way, and Warwick went to Paris 
to negotiate a marriage treaty between the king's 
sister, Margaret, and the French royal house. But 
while the earl was absent, the princess was betrothed 
to Charles the Rash, eldest son of the Duke of 
Burgundy (1466), and at the same time Edward 
showed his open hostility to the Nevilles by dis- 
missing the Chancellor. 

Warwick now threw himself into opposition. 
George, Duke of Clarence, the king's brother:, was 
persuaded to become the nominal head of the mal- 
contents, and married the earl's elder daughter. 
Risings took place in various parts of England, the 
queen's father and one of her brothers were captured 
and executed, and Edward himself was, for a tirne, 
a prisoner. The outbreak of a rebellion in favour of 
Henry VI. brought about a reconciliation, but this 
was recognised by all as being merely temporary. 
Shortly afterwards, a fresh rising in Lincolnshire 
was secretly supported by Warwick and Clarence, 
who had been commissioned to subdue it. Edward 
discovered their treachery and marched against 
them ; the rebel army fled at his approach, and the 
two leaders took refuge in France (1470). Here 
they were well received by Louis, who found means 
to reconcile Warwick and Margaret of Anjou. A 
bargain was struck by which the son of Henry VI. 
was to marry the earl's younger daughter, and the 
Nevilles undertook to restore the Lancastrian dynasty. 



BATTLE OF BAR NET IO5 

Clarence was to succeed in event of the failure of 
Henry's direct heirs, but he was dissatisfied with 
this arrangement and secretly negotiated with his 
brother. 

In pursuance of this compact, Warwick invaded 
England and was at once joined by the other mem- 
bers of his family. Edward had neglected to make 
any preparations for defence, and barely escaped to 
Flanders, while the " Kingmaker " occupied London 
and caused Henry VI. to be recrowned. But the 
Yorkist party did not accept the change, and 
Edward, having landed with a small force of Bur- 
gundians, was quickly joined by Clarence. Slipping 
past Warwick, he re-entered London, which city 
gladly welcorned him, and then, with an increased 
force, prepared to meet the Lancastrian army. The 
decisive battle was fought at Barnet, and ended 
in a complete victory for the king, Warwick and 
Montague being both killed (1471). A few weeks 
later, Margaret, who had landed at Weymouth, was 
defeated at Tewkesbury, as she was trying to 
reach Wales ; she herself was captured and her 
son murdered in cold blood. The defeat of a 
naval attack upon London and the assassination of 
Henry VI. were the final blows to the Lancastrian 
party, which was now represented by the earls of 
Oxford and Pembroke, and Henry of Richmond, 
who were refugees in Brittany. 

Relieved from all danger at home, Edward now 
turned his attention to foreign affairs. As has been 
seen, Louis XI. had assisted the Lancastrian party, 
and, consequently, Charles the Rash, now Duke of 



I06 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

Burgundy, had little difficulty in persuading the 
English king to attack France. But though he 
landed in Normandy with a large army, Edward 
was not very much in earnest, and the failure of 
his allies to fulfil their promise of co-operation further 
weakened him in his purpose. Louis scattered bribes 
lavishly among the members of the English Council, 
and a personal meeting between the two kings was 
arranged. At Pecquigny, a peace was concluded 
(1475). In return for a large sum in ready money 
— an annual pension — and the promise of the 
Dauphin's hand for Princess Elizabeth, Edward 
agreed to evacuate France ana to abandon Charles. 
The war was not very glorious for either party ; but 
such an ending was much better for both countries 
than a revival of Henry V.'s schemes. Louis bought 
the consolidation of his kingdom, while England 
was saved by the avarice of her king from a struggle 
which would have been disastrous. 

On his return from France, Edward gave himself 
up to the pursuit of pleasure, and the last years 
of his reign are marked by few important events. 
For a while, indeed, it seemed possible that the 
ambition of Clarence might lead to a renewal of civil 
war. He had quarrelled with his younger brother 
Richard, Duke of Gloucester, concerning the inherit- 
ance of Warwick. As already mentioned, Clarence 
had married the earl's elder daughter, and after the 
battle of Barnet, Gloucester married the younger. 
The result was a violent dispute, which was settled 
by the king and Parliament. But Clarence con- 
sidered that he had been wronged, and when, after 



DEATH OF CLARENCE 1 07 

his wife's death, he was prevented by Edward from 
marrying Mary of Burgundy, the heiress of Charles 
the Rash, he began to plot against his brother. An 
excuse was found, however, to impeach him ; he was 
imprisoned in the Tower on a charge of having worked 
against the king's life by magical arts, and very soon 
after it was announced that he was dead (1478). 

The last act of the reign was an expedition against 
Scotland. James III. had expelled his brother, the 
Duke of Albany, and Gloucester was sent to restore 
him and to place him on the throne. The Scotch, 
however, offered a stout resistance, and, though 
Albany was allowed to regain his lands, the English 
army effected nothing but the recovery of Berwick. 
Edward died while planning an invasion of France 
to revenge himself on Louis, who had broken off the 
proposed marriage alliance, leaving two young sons, 
Edward and Richard, the elder of whom was at once 
proclaimed king, as Edward V. (1483). 

The next three years are marked by a series of 
rapid changes, which culminated in the accession of 
the House of Tudor. The death of Edward IV. 
left four parties in England : the Lancastrians, who 
had still a few supporters ; the Woodville family ; 
the new nobility, which had been created by the 
Yorkists ; and the remnants of the old nobility, who 
were represented by the Dukes of Gloucester and 
Buckingham. Of these parties, the first was at 
present too weak to assert itself, and the first con- 
flict was between the nobles, old and new, and the 
family of the queen mother. Gloucester utilised the 
general unpopularity of the Woodvilles to combine the 



to8 The house of voRft 

rest of England against them. Asserting his right, as 
first prince of the blood, to a predominant share in the 
government, he arrested Rivers and Grey and caused 
them to be imprisoned. Marching to London he 
persuaded the Council to declare him Protector, and 
then turned against the new nobility. The destruc- 
tion of that party was accomplished by the execution 
of Hastings, while the two princes were lodged in 
the Tower. Having thus removed all his rivals, 
Gloucester proceeded to claim the crown. He 
asserted that he was the only legitimate son of 
Richard of York ; a public sermon set forth his title 
and abilities, and, despite the absence of popular 
support, the Protector was proclaimed as Richard HI. 
The revolution excited little or no feeling. As a 
matter of fact, the country was already weary of 
constant internal strife, and Richard might have 
maintained his position had he not committed a 
serious blunder. At first, he displayed a very con- 
ciliatory spirit ; Stanley, who had been a supporter 
of Hastings, was appointed Constable ; the body of 
Henry VI. was given a decent burial at Windsor, 
and even Morton, Bishop of Ely, an energetic 
Lancastrian agitator, was left at large. He was 
well received on his progress through the kingdom, 
but it was in the midst of this progress that he made 
his great mistake. This was the assassination of his 
two nephews. There is little doubt now that they 
were murdered, and by his orders, although the 
strange career of Perkin Warbeck led many at a 
later date to believe that the younger prince had 
escaped. At the time, in any case, Richard was 




Photo] [Emery Walker. 

KING RICHARD III. (1452-I485). 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 



no THE HOUSE OF YORK 

regarded as having caused them to be put to death, 
and, even if he were innocent, the result remained 
the same. His popularity vanished ; the Yorkists 
could tolerate his usurpation, but not this needless 
murder, and the death of Edward IV.'s sons left 
room for the Lancastrians to reassert themselves. 
And now the very measures by which the king had 
tried to conciliate his opponents contributed to his 
fall. Morton made use of his liberty to act as an 
intermediary between the Woodvilles and Richmond, 
who was put forward as the candidate for the throne, 
and it was through him that a compromise was 
reached which united the disaffected Yorkists and the 
Lancastrians. It was arranged that Elizabeth of 
York should marry Henry, and thus unite the claims 
of both houses. Soon afterwards Buckingham was 
won over to the new coalition. He found that, 
despite his services, he was rejected by Richard in 
favour of men of low birth, like Ratcliffe, Catesby, 
and Lovel, who are satirised in the doggerel of 
the time. Accordingly, he offered his support to 
Richmond, hoping, perhaps, to play the part of a 
second " Kingmaker." 

But the plot was revealed to Richard, and he 
hastily collected his forces. Buckingham was pre- 
vented by floods from crossing the Severn, his 
army dispersed, and, being betrayed to the king, 
the duke was summarily executed (1483). Else- 
where the rebellion collapsed. The south had 
risen, but submitted as soon as the royal army 
appeared, and Richmond, though he reached 
Plymouth, was compelled to return to Brittany. 



FALL OF RICHARD IlL III 

A wholesale confiscation of estates followed, and 
Richard filled the south with his devoted adherents 
from the north. All his efforts, indeed, were now 
directed to prepare for the attack which was certain 
to come. A truce with Scotland was concluded, 
a fleet and army raised, Richmond was obliged to 
leave Brittany and take refuge in France, and a 
marriage was proposed between the Prince of Wales 
and Elizabeth. But the opposition continued to 
grow in strength. Popular feeling turned against 
Richard, his position was weakened by the death 
of his son, and Charles VIII. openly supported 
the cause of Richmond. On the death of his wife 
the king even thought of marrying his niece, a 
desperate measure, which would have weakened 
Henry's cause, but the indignation which the report 
aroused compelled the abandonment of the idea. 
Still Richard resolved to make a supreme effort 
to save his throne, and, as soon as he heard that 
Richmond was about to sail, he encamped at Notting- 
ham to be ready to strike in any direction. But the 
Stanleys, whom he had raised to high rank, were 
secretly traitors. When Richmond landed at 
Milford Haven he was speedily joined by Sir 
William Stanley, and the opportune desertion of 
Lord Stanley on the field of battle turned the scale 
against the king. Market Bosworth was the scene 
of the final struggle of the Wars of the Roses. 
Here the Lancastrians gained a decisive victory 
and Richard fell in the thick of the fight. With 
his death active resistance ended, and Richmond was 
acknowledged as Henry VII. (1485). 



112 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

The character of Richard III, has been a subject 
for much discussion, and he has been generally 
regarded as a sort of monster. The physical deformity 
from which he suffered has been taken as the index 
of his mind, he has been considered as the murderer 
of Henry VI., of Edward, Prince of Wales, and of 
Clarence, as well as the instigator of many other 
crimes, including the assassination of the two 
princes in the Tower. But it is probable that his 
wickedness has been exaggerated. The only con- 
temporary " accounts of him were composed by 
partisans of Henry VII., who might be expected 
to blacken the character of the enemy of the 
reigning house. As a matter of fact, Edward IV. 
must be held as partly, if not wholly responsible 
for the earlier crimes attributed to Richard, and 
only the murder of his nephews can be said to 
have been entirely due to him. He was, at worst, 
an unscrupulous man in an age which did not 
recognise scruples, cruel when all were cruel, and, 
judged by the standard of his own time, not really 
a worse man than his contemporaries. Indeed, he 
was, in some ways, superior to most. He was 
loyal to Edward IV., when loyalty was a very 
rare virtue, he was a good son and father, he was 
an able ruler, and used his " ill-gotten " power well. 
Indeed, his chief fault was ambition, which led him 
to force his way to the throne, and there have 
been many worse men, and worse kings, than 
Richard III. 

At first sight the Yorkist period may appear to 
have been merely the continuation of that which 



THE YORKIST GOVERNMENT II3 

immediately preceded it, but it was really a time 
of transition, a despotic interlude between the con- 
stitutional limited monarchy of the Lancastrians 
and the no less constitutional personal monarchy 
of the Tudors. During the reigns of Edward IV. 
and Richard III. Parliament was almost suspended; 
it was merely summoned to register the decisions 
of the Crown or to give a fictitious legality to its 
acts. And a combination of causes contributed to 
bring about this result. The destruction of the 
Baronage almost extinguished the Upper House, 
such peers as there were were the nominees of 
the king, bound to support the original of their 
own importance. At the same time the introduction 
of a restricted franchise, while it led to the members 
of the House of Commons being drawn from a better 
class, made it more easy for the Crown, or for 
the predominant party, to influence the elections. 
Packed Parliaments were, consequently, the rule 
rather than the exception at this time. And the 
failure of the Commons to cope with the disorder 
of the time led to popular indifference on the subject 
of Parliament. So long as there was a strong 
central government the mass of the people were 
satisfied. Moreover, the chief cause, which had led 
to the frequent and regular assembling of the 
estates, was removed. In the first year of his reign 
Edward IV. received the grant of tonnage and 
poundage and a tax on wool for his life, and was 
thus relieved, to a great extent, from the necessity 
of seeking financial aid from the Commons. His 
pension from Louis XI. made him still more 

9 



114 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

independent, and he further increased his resources 
by introducing " Benevolences " — nominally free 
gifts to the king by his subjects, really compulsory 
grants — and by his successful mercantile adventures. 
During his reign, therefore, Parliament rarely met, 
when it did so it was merely an assembly packed 
in the interests of the Government The weakness 
of Richard III. compelled him to seek support 
from every available quarter, and he declared 
" Benevolences " to be illegal, but his career as a 
constitutional ruler was checked by the attacks of 
Richmond. On the whole, the Yorkist period marks 
the lowest point in the history of Parliament, its 
authority had disappeared, and there was no wish 
on the part of the people to see it restored. 

And while the decline of the Commons con- 
tributed to the growth of the royal power, the 
other bodies, which tended to weaken the monarchy 
in times past, were brought into a position of 
dependence upon the king. The Baronage had 
been opposed to absolutism no less than to true 
popular liberty, they were, indeed, the enemies of 
all authority except their own. But in the French 
war and the subsequent civil strife they had been 
annihilated. The work which had been begun at 
Agincourt, and continued at Northampton and 
Towton, was completed at Barnet and Tewkesbury. 
Warwick and Buckingham were practically the last 
of the old barons, and the new nobility which arose 
under Edward TV. was by its very nature incapable 
of resisting the Crown. For it consisted of men, 
like the Stanleys or Howards, who had been raised 



DESTRUCTION OF THE FEUDAL BARONAGE II5 

from obscurity by the royal favour alone and who 
depended for their importance upon a continuance 
of that favour. Without the prestige and influence 
of their predecessors, the new nobles were reduced 
to the position of mere satellites of the court. In 
other words, the destruction of the old feudal 
Baronage was completed in the Yorkist period. 
Henceforth, although there are great men in 
English history — great, that is, by reason of their 
wealth and the extent of their estates — there are 
no more " overmighty subjects," the greatest peer 
is insignificant when compared to the king, and 
the nobility cease to be capable of offering effective 
opposition to the Crown. 

And in the case of the Church a very similar 
result was reached. It has been already pointed 
out that the Lancastrians had relied upon the 
clergy in no small degree, and that they had 
assisted in the suppression of heresy. It has further 
been mentioned that the triumph of the Church 
was rather apparent than real, that it had been 
gained at the expense of that popular confidence 
which had been the chief safeguard of its existence, 
and that, while alLopen opposition was crushed for a 
time, yet it was only the support of the monarchy 
which staved off the certain doom. During the 
Yorkist period the same evils which Wycliff had 
attacked prevailed in the Church. Vicious, wealthy, 
and worldly, the clergy forfeited the respect of 
the people, they were hated for their pride and 
envied for their riches, and fell more and more 
into disrepute. In order to preserve their posses- 



Il6 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

sions they were obliged to show constant devotion 
to the Crown, and they were in no position to resume 
the task of championing popular liberty. And so, 
while Parliament was almost forgotten and the 
Baronage destroyed as a political force, the Church 
lost her independence, and there was no body left 
to resist the growing power of the Monarchy. In 
this way the Yorkist period forms a species of 
introduction to that of the Tudors ; the era of 
personal government begins, during which the king, 
secure in the support of all classes, enjoys almost 
absolute power. And yet, however, the system was 
not perfected, and it was left for Henry VII. to 
complete the work of organisation. 

While the power of the Monarchy was thus being 
established, the policy of the Yorkist kings con- 
tributed to assist the rise of that party which was 
destined eventually to overthrow the royal authority, 
to abolish personal government, and to restore the 
influence of Parliament. It has been seen that 
Edward IV. allied himself with Burgundy, but 
that, though he attacked France, he did not 
attempt the recovery of the old English possessions 
on the Continent. And these two decisions had 
momentous results. The first marked a return to 
the commercial policy of Edward III. ; to that 
union with Flanders which had been the chief feature 
of English foreign policy in the past, but which 
had been neglected during the later Lancastrian 
period. And the second, the treaty of Pecquigny, 
indicated two things : firstly, that the alliance 
with Charles was essentially a commercial alliance 




Photo] [Emery Walker. 

LOUIS XI., KING OF FRANCE (1423-I483). 

-Froin a drawinsr in the British Afuseum. 



Il8 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

and not intended to involve England in a con- 
tinental war ; and, secondly, that the schemes of 
Henry V. had been abandoned. It is true that 
Edward continued to hold the title of King of 
France and that the pension received from Louis XL 
was termed tribute, but there was no real idea of 
asserting the claim of Edward III., save in the 
minds of a few reactionary visionaries. The future 
interference of England on the Continent was aimed 
at the maintenance of the balance of power. An 
attempt to conquer France was hardly more in the 
region of practical politics in the reign of Edward IV. 
than in that of George III. The ideas of modern 
foreign policy begin to appear, though as yet they 
are not fully expounded. 

And with the abandonment of the reactionary 
policy of Henry V. commerce revived. The Yorkist 
kings gave great attention to trade, Edward IV. was 
himself a merchant and set an example of enterprise. 
At the same time some efforts were directed to 
restore the navy by the encouragement of ship- 
building, and an attempt was made to repress the 
prevalent piracy. From this date, also, the trade of 
England began to be conducted by Englishmen, 
instead of by Catalans, Genoese, and Hanseatic 
merchants. Attention was directed to the regula- 
tion of commerce. The export of gold was 
discouraged by the enactment of sumptuary laws 
and the establishment of the staple, and, although 
such measures were ill-advised, the adoption of that 
policy, which was ultimately elaborated into the- 
mercantile system, shows an increased interest in 



INTRODUCTION OF PRINTING II9 

the welfare of English trade. Internally the gilds 
began to collapse in this period. Free competition 
was slowly established, and though it resulted in 
much immediate distress, it ultimately benefited the 
country by removing those artificial restrictions 
which had hampered industry. The cities -which 
had escaped the calamities of the civil war grew 
richer and more important, while the people, released 
from the yoke of villeinage, improved their general 
condition. And, in short, the period was one of 
social progress ; in it there was an advance on 
the part of that middle-class which at a much later 
date formed the backbone of the Puritan opposition 
to Charles L, and, while Edward IV. established 
an absolute monarchy in all but name and form, 
his foreign policy helped forward the eventual 
reaction. 

But, while the support given to commercial enter- 
prise was destined to lead to the restoration of liberty, 
there was another way in which Edward uncon- 
sciously assisted to undo his own work. He was the 
patron of Caxton, and thus contributed to the intro- 
duction into England of the most formidable of all 
the enemies of despotism — the art of printing. 
Assisted by royal favour, Caxton set up his press 
at Westminster, and thence poured forth his printed 
books upon the country. It is hardly necessary to 
dwell upon the importance of the new art. Whereas 
hitherto the manuscript works, laboriously transcribed 
by monks, had been almost, if not quite, unprocurable 
by the people at large, books now became compara- 
tively common, and the clergy were no longer able 



120 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

to control the public mind by preventing the circula- 
tion of such works as they did not approve. The 
introduction of printing was followed by a spread of 
profane literature. Men were no longer content with 
insipid hagiologies or the dull chronicles of the 
monks ; they turned from them to the masterpieces 
of Rome. And presently the New Learning came to 
England also with that freedom of thought which 
was imbibed from the writings of classical authors 
and which led to the spiritual and political upheaval 
of the Reformation. Great is the debt of gratitude 
owed to Edward IV. as the patron of Caxton, as 
having protected, in its infancy, that art upon which 
liberty mainly rests. 

Thus while the Yorkist period is characterised by 
a great advance in the royal power, it is also marked 
by considerable commercial progress and by a general 
raising of the middle class. And the end of Richard 
III.'s reign, since it is followed by a new system of 
government, affords an opportunity for considering 
the general results of the period of about a century 
and a quarter since the Black Death. That time was 
marked at first by rapid constitutional advance, cul- 
minating in the establishment of a limited monarchy 
under the Lancastrians. But then the weakness of 
the executive led to the outbreak of civil war, and in 
the general confusion Parliament appeared to lose all 
that it had gained. A strong personal monarchy 
followed, when the king attained to practically abso- 
lute power. But the new government adopted a 
commercial, in place of a continental, policy, and in 
accordance with the proposition, which has been 




Photo] [Emery Walker. 

ELIZABETH OF YORK, QUEEN-CONSORT OF HENRY VII. (1465-I503). 

From the ejffigy by Torregiano on the nt-omimentin Westminster Abbey. 



122 THE HOUSE OF YORK 

already laid down, constitutional progress resulted 
from the decline of militarism ; for though, at first 
sight, the Monarchy was supreme and unrivalled, yet 
there was really much popular influence, and signs 
were not wanting to show the ultimate course of 
events. 

The essence of the new monarchy was that it was 
popular. The people were weary of a weak executive 
and welcomed the strong rule of Edward IV. But 
though the royal power was great, it was not great 
enough to despise popular feeling, and as time went 
on this became more and more true. Had the 
Yorkists entered upon foreign wars they might have 
laid the foundation of a permanent despotism, but 
their actual policy prevented this. For they created 
an opposition, or rather a party, which might 
eventually oppose them. When the Baronage and 
the Church were powerless to resist the Crown, the 
rise of the commercial classes saved England from a 
tyranny, and this rise was due to the foreign policy of 
the Yorkists, continued by the Tudors. In short, this 
period may be regarded as preparatory. In it those 
maxims of government were introduced which guided 
Henry VII. and his successors, and while it seems 
to be a time of unrestrained royal power, it is really 
the period in which the popular party gathered 
strength. Under the Tudors that party grows 
stronger and stronger, until the Monarchy ceases 
to be popular, when it no longer supports the Crown, 
but becomes an active opposition, and triumphs in 
the Puritan Revolution. 

To sum up, the England of 1485 shows a marked 



ENGLAND IN \\%^ 123 

advance on the England of 1350. The feudal 
Monarchy has disappeared, the feudal Baronage 
has gone, and the feudal land system has almost 
passed away. The continental policy of the Plan- 
tagenets has been finally abandoned. The country 
is rapidly growing into a great commercial state, and 
with this growth the middle class rises. And though 
Parliament has declined in power and the Monarchy 
grown in strength, yet the basis of that Monarchy is 
popular, and its strength lies in the fact that it is 
needed to give that peace to the country which shall 
enable the people to consolidate their strength. The 
history of the next period is that of the gradual rise 
of a strong opposition, under the rule of a line of 
kings, who neglected their opportunity to destroy 
the liberties of the country. 




VI 



THE TUDOR MONARCHY 



(1485-1529) 



With the battle of Bosworth active resistance to 
the new king ended. The nation was anxious for 
peace, and in his slow progress from the Midlands to 
London Henry was everywhere applauded and wel- 
comed as the saviour of society. In the universal joy 
his sternly repressive measures were overlooked or 
condoned. He was in no wise inclined to leave the 
hostile factions in peace. Edward, Earl of Warwick, 
the son of Clarence, who was the hope of one section 
of Yorkists, was sent to the Tower, and even the 
Princess Elizabeth was placed in safe keeping. 
Some degree of severity was, indeed, justified by the 
difficulties of Henry's position. In the first place, his 
title to the throne was uncertain ; in the second, he 
knew well that the combination of parties which had 
given him his victory was the result rather of hatred 
for Richard III. than of affection for himself. He 
was obliged, therefore, to destroy the remains of the 
Yorkist party, and to secure the crown, before he con- 



124 



HENRY VII. S TITLE 125 

ciliated his opponents. And here he was met by a 
very serious problem ; for while there were three 
grounds upon which he might base his claim to the 
throne, there were strong objections against resting 
upon any of them. In the first place, he might have 
asserted the right of conquest, but no one knew 
better than Henry himself that though he had 
defeated Richard, he had not reduced England, and 
that such a claim would have irritated the Yorkist 
section of his supporters. His second alternative was 
to marry Elizabeth and reign as her husband, but his 
pride shrank from owing his position to a woman, 
and, moreover, the claim of the Earl of Warwick was 
preferred by many to that of the daughter of 
Edward IV. Finally, he could pose as the repre- 
sentative of the Lancastrian claim. His connection 
with that family was remote. He traced his descent 
from John of Gaunt, through the Beauforts, the sons 
of Catherine Swynford, who had been legitimised 
under Richard II., but expressly excluded from the 
succession,^ and consequently his hereditary title was 
at best shadowy, and actually non-existent. Even- 
tually, however, after much deliberation, he decided 
upon a compromise, and, while adopting the Lancas- 
trian claim as his principal title, he confused the issue 
by using the other alternatives as supports. From 
this decision there arose much trouble, and the inter- 
nal disturbances which marked his reign were due in 
no small measure to the fact that Henry was nomin- 
ally the champion of one party instead of being king 
of both 

^ This exclusion was not legally valid. 



126 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

For a time, however, he enjoyed a brief interval of 
peace. Five days after the battle of Bosworth he 
entered London in state, and the coronation, which 
was delayed by an outbreak of the sweating sickness, 
passed off in peace. In the granting of honours upon 
this occasion, Henry showed marked moderation. 
Only one new peer was created, for the king was 
resolved not to revive the Baronage by lavish 
generosity. At the same time, he caused all the 
Acts of the last reign to be declared void ; he 
attainted his opponents as traitors, and confiscated 
their property, and he resumed the royal estates, 
which had been alienated during the civil war. 
Having thus taken measures to secure his throne, he 
redeemed the pledge given in exile and married 
Elizabeth of York in the following year, although he 
showed his jealousy of her superior title and his firm 
resolve not to rule by her means, by delaying her 
coronation until nearly twelve months later. Even 
then the performance of the ceremony was hastened 
by a revival of Yorkist activity and the appearance of 
Lambert Simnel. 

The Yorkist party indeed, though temporarily 
crushed, was not extinguished, and was not pre- 
pared to submit quietly to the new government. It 
had two great sources of strength in Ireland and 
Burgundy. Since the reign of Richard II. the con- 
dition of the former country had been one of 
continual unrest, and the English authority in the 
island had been growing weaker and weaker 
During the Wars of the Roses it had formed a 
recruiting ground for the Yorkists, and the Lord 



MARGARET OF BURGUNDY 127 

Deputy, the Earl of Kildare, was a zealous supporter 
of that party. And, since the royal power did not 
reach much beyond the ports, Ireland afforded an 
excellent base of operations for any attack upon 
Henry. At the same time, it would not have been 
easy to organise a rebellion there, and so Burgundy 
was even more valuable to the malcontents. It has 
been seen that Edward IV. had entered into alliance 
with that duchy, and his sister, the Duchess Dowager 
Margaret, was possessed of great influence in the 
Low Countries, and also ruler of her dower lands in 
complete independence. She was bitterly opposed 
to the Lancastrians, and only too ready to assist in 
any attempt to overthrow Henry. Possessed of very 
considerable wealth, she was able to fit out expe- 
ditions for this purpose, while her power was equal to 
the protection of refugees. It was in Burgundy, 
therefore, that the Yorkist plots were hatched, their 
armaments prepared, and a safe retreat found in case 
of defeat. In England itself the malcontents were, 
perhaps, not very important ; the strength of the 
party lay in the late ministers of Richard III., in 
the irreconcilable supporters of the house of York, 
and in those men who considered themselves as 
having been slighted by the new king, or as not 
having been adequately rewarded. The mass of 
the people was inclined to be apathetic, and, if 
it were necessary to take sides, was more 
likely to support the reigning monarch than his 
opponents. 

With so many enemies round him it could not be 
expected that Henry would long be left in peace, and, 



128 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

actually, the first rising against him took place very 
shortly after his marriage. While he was making a 
progress through Yorkshire in order to reconcile the 
northern counties, he learnt that a plot had been 
arranged to kidnap him. Its organisers were Lord 
Lovel (the favourite of the late king), and the two 
Staffords (relatives of the Duke of Buckingham). 
They succeeded in gathering some troops together, 
and the Staffords besieged Worcester, but the 
energetic measures of the king caused the collapse 
of the rebellion. Lovel fled to Burgundy, where 
several Yorkists had already taken refuge, while 
Henry caused the elder Stafford to be hanged, and 
pardoned the younger (i486). 

But though this attempt had been so easily crushed, 
the malcontents did not despair, and with the help of 
Margaret they organised a much more formidable 
rising. The Earl of Warwick was put forward as the 
legitimate heir, but as it was feared that an open 
rebellion in his favour would merely cause Henry to 
put him to death, it was resolved to find some one to 
impersonate him. By these means the life of the 
earl would be secured by the king's own interest 
while in event of success the pretender could be 
easily removed. The Yorkists found the necessary 
instrument ready to hand. For some obscure reason 
a priest, Richard Simon, had induced a boy to 
pretend that he was Richard, Duke of York, the 
younger brother of Edward V. This was Lambert 
Simnel, who was born of humble parents at Oxford 
but had received a better education than the ordinary. 
The exiles had little difficulty in persuading Simnel 



LAMBERT SIMM EL 1 29 

to change his role, and he was presently sent to 
Ireland, where Kildare at once acknowledged him as 
the Earl of Warwick, and caused him to be crowned 
at Dublin. An Irish army was collected for the 
invasion of England, and was soon joined by Lovel, 
John de la Pole (Earl of Lincoln), and Martin 
Schwarz, with a body of German mercenaries and 
a small Yorkist contingent 

With the forces thus raised the rebels crossed to 
Lancashire, but they found that the people would 
give them no help. The king had paraded Warwick 
through the streets of London in order to discredit 
the impostor, and this tended to confirm the waverers 
in their allegiance. It was in vain that the Yorkists 
marched across England, when they encountered 
the royal army at Stoke-upon-Trent, they had not 
received any considerable accession of strength. The 
battle which followed proved decisive. Schwarz and 
his mercenaries were exterminated; the Irish gave 
way before the disciplined troops of the king ; 
Lincoln was killed ; the rebel army was dispersed, 
and Simnel was taken prisoner (1487). Lovel 
escaped from the field, but was heard of no more ; 
probably the skeleton found three hundred years 
later in a secret room at Minster Lovel was his, and 
he met his death from starvation. Henry adopted 
strong measures to punish the authors of the rising, 
and another series of confiscations took place, which 
served to complete the destruction of the Yorkist 
party in England. To Simnel he showed con- 
temptuous mercy ; he was made a scullion in the 
royal kitchen, and was afterwards cupbearer. 

10 



130 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

The end of this rebellion was followed by four 
years of internal peace, daring which Henry con- 
solidated his power, but there then arose another 
impostor, far more dangerous than the first. Simnel 
appears to have been merely a tool, but Perkin 
Warbeck was possessed of considerable talent, and 
gained credence all over Europe. There is now little 
doubt that he was merely the son of a tanner of 
Tournay, but the evidence is so clearly that of 
partial witnesses that even at the present day there 
are some who believe that he was, as he claimed to 
be, Richard, Duke of York. And so it is not sur- 
prising that at a time when the fate of the two 
princes was shrouded in mystery, and in an age when 
the critical faculty was not yet developed, the story 
told by Warbeck should have been readily accepted. 
He made his first appearance at Cork, but fearing 
arrest at the hands of Henry's partisans, he soon 
retired to Burgundy.^ Here, it is said, he met 
Margaret accidentally, and was at once greeted by 
her as Richard, Duke of York ; and though this 
story is probably untrue, its existence shows that 
there must have been a considerable degree of 
resemblance between the pretender and the prince. 
In any case he was well received, and was acknow- 
ledged as King of England, and the influence of the 
duchess procured him a similar acknowledgment 
from her relative, Maximilian, King of the Romans. 
The outbreak of war between Henry VH. and France 
induced Charles VHI. to invite him to Paris, where 

^ There is some doubt as to whether Warbeck's first visit to 
Burgundy was before or after his visit to Paris. 



wmim iiP iMB i m i 



"^/-■nr «. V'V'' '•vrijsaaptmmmfsmiff^m 










Photd\ 



PERKIN WARBECK (1474-I499). 



\_E7nery Walker, 



Frpjn a dratving by a French or Fleinish artist of the sixteenth century^ 
preserved at Arras y France, 



132 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

he received a cordial welcome (1492) ; was recog- 
nised as " Richard IV. of England," and promised 
help for the recovery of his throne. Before any 
expedition, however, had been actually fitted out, the 
Treaty of Etaples was concluded, and in accordance 
with one of its provisions Warweck was expelled 
from the French dominions. He returned to Bur- 
gundy, and began to negotiate with the disaffected 
nobles in England ; but at the moment when every- 
thing seemed to be ready for a rebellion, Henry 
intercepted his correspondence. As a result the 
English ringleaders were executed, among them Sir 
William Stanley, who had again changed sides, and 
the survivors were awed into submission. When 
soon afterwards the pretender effected a landing on 
the coast of Kent, the local forces proved equal to 
the task of repelling him (1495). He sailed away to 
Ireland, but met with no more success, failing in an 
attack on Waterford, and being unable to excite a 
popular outbreak, and in all respects his fortunes 
appeared to be declining, when a new friend came 
forward to help him. 

This friend was James IV. of Scotland, who was 
then on bad terms with Henry. Probably because 
he thought that the pretender might prove a useful 
instrument in his hands, he invited Warbeck to his 
court, and acknowledged his title to the English 
throne. But he went further than had the other 
foreign supporters of the impostor, and by giving 
him Lady Katherine Gordon in marriage, almost 
appeared to prove that he really believed him to be 
the Duke of York. For the bride was a near relation 



THE CORNISH RISING 1 33 

to the royal house of Scotland and a lady of great 
beauty ; and if James were not really serious in his 
support of Warbeck, he at least spared no pains to 
convince others that he was. After the marriage had 
been celebrated with almost regal splendour, Warbeck 
was placed in command of an army, and sent to attack 
Northern England (1496). But hatred of the Scotch 
prevailed over affection for the Yorkist house ; not a 
man joined the invaders, and the expedition ended in 
complete failure. And though the pretender con- 
tinued to reside for a time at Edinburgh, the zeal of 
James abated when he saw that the chance of 
Warbeck's ultimate success was small, and he prob- 
ably hastened, if he did not compel, his departure to 
Ireland, Here he met with no more support than 
before, and he eagerly embraced the opportunity 
which offered itself, for him to make a last attempt 
in a new quarter. 

This was in Cornwall, which had risen against 
Henry, owing to the^ oppressive taxation of the king 
at the very time when Warbeck was attacking the 
northern counties. Led at first by a lawyer and a 
furrier, the rebels marched eastwards, and were 
joined by Lord Audley. Under his command they 
pressed on towards London and entered Kent, where 
they tried in vain to collect some reinforcements. 
But meanwhile the king had recalled his forces from 
the north, and was able to surround the Cornishmen 
at Blackheath, and to compel them to surrender 
(1497). The three leaders were put to death, while 
the others were pardoned and sent home. Warbeck 
had heard in Scotland of the rising in the West, and 



134 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

he entertained hopes that the same men might be 
induced to rebel again if a leader appeared among 
them. Accordingly he landed in Cornwall with a 
small force, and was joined by some three thousand 
men. With this army he made a demonstration 
before Exeter, but that city was too strongly held 
for him to take it. Devonshire rose against him, and 
Warbeck, after moving upon Taunton, suddenly 
deserted his followers, and took sanctuary at Beau- 
lieu x\bbey. His army quietly dispersed, and his 
career as a pretender was over (1497). Hitherto he 
had sustained his part with considerable credit, but 
now he devoted all his attention to escaping the 
scaffold. On receiving a promise that his life should 
be spared, he publicly confessed his imposture, gave 
himself up to Henry, and was imprisoned in the 
Tower. Here he met the Earl of Warwick, with 
whom he formed a close friendship, but after about 
a year's imprisonment he was accused of attempting 
to escape, and both he and his fellow prisoner were 
executed (1499). It is possible that the alleged plot 
was merely put forward by Henry as an excuse for 
him to do what he had already intended, and that 
the real reason for the execution of the two was the 
king's desire to satisfy Ferdinand of Spain, who was 
unwilling to complete the pending negotiations for a 
marriage alliance until all danger of a revolution in 
England had been removed. In any case, the death 
of Warwick destroyed the last hopes of the Yorkists. 
Edmund de la Pole, the representative of that party, 
fled to Burgundy, and no further outbreak disturbed 
the tranquility of the house of Tudor during Henry's 



henry's reforms 135 

reign. Of Warbeck it may be said that no imposture 
in history has been more skilfully maintained. During 
the six years of his career he did not once make a slip 
which could reveal his true identity, and, as has been 
said, there are still a few who even now hold that the 
fact of his imposture is non- proven. The evidence of 
his birth was obtained admittedly by means of agents 
employed by the king, and thus open to grave sus- 
picion on the score of partiality, while the confession 
made by Warbeck himself was extorted by the fear 
of death.i 

While he was engaged in defending himself against 
these two pretenders, Henry was at the same time 
doing all in his power to secure his position by 
measures of internal reform. Suspending detailed 
criticism upon his policy for the present, it is 
necessary to sketch its chief features here, and it 
may be premised that it was all directed to render 
rebellion unlikely, if not quite impossible, or to secure 
that, in event of a rising, the advantage should lie, as 
far as might be, with the existing government. His 
security was endangered by the obvious weakness of 
his hereditary title, by the possibility of a revival of 
the Baronage, and by the low state of his treasury, 
and the primary object of his government was to 
remove these dangers. His first measure was 
intended to induce the country to accept his rule 
by protecting those who served him from the prob- 
able results of a revolution. This was the purpose of 
his statute, which declared that it is lawful in every 

^ One theory, which seems to merit more attention than it has 
received, suggests that he was an illegitimate son of Edward IV. 



136 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

case to support the de facto king, and which freed 
those who did so from the penalties of high treason 
(1495). It must be added that the adherents of 
Richard III. at Bosworth were specially excepted 
from the benefits of the new law by means of an 
outrageous legal fiction, Henry's reign being dated 
from the day before the battle. The natural tendency 
of this statute was to discourage hasty rebellion, since 
it was obviously wiser to watch the course of events 
than to join either party, or, if this course were 
impossible, to support the reigning king. 

But Henry was not content with the mere holding 
out of inducements to obedience ; he also took 
measures to compel it. It has been already pointed 
out that the practice of " maintenance " enabled 
powerful offenders, to escape justice, and rendered 
them practically independent on their own estates. 
To meet this evil that court, which is commonly 
known as the Star Chamber, was established (1487). 
It consisted of the most influential members of the 
Privy Council, and was in the first instance given 
jurisdiction in all cases where the local courts were 
unlikely to be able to give a free verdict. In the 
course of time it extended its sphere, and absorbed 
the functions of the original Star Chamber of 
Edward 1 11.,^ whence it acquired the name under 
which it became notorious as one of the chief engines 
of Stuart tyranny. During the reign of Henry VII., 
however, it did an excellent work in abolishing a 
practice which had hitherto been one of the chief 

^ A committee of the Royal Council, having jurisdiction in all 
matters outside the province of the Court of Chancery. 



LIVERIES 137 

sources of strength to a turbulent Baronage, and in 
thus contributing to the preservation of law and 
order. And at the some time Henry strictly 
enforced the laws against " Liveries." It was the 
practice of the great men to keep a number of 
dependents who wore the badge of their lord, sup- 
ported him in every case, and were fed in his hall. 
They formed an army ready to hand, and their 
existence had been invaluable to the barons in the 
civil wars. Richard III. had declared the granting of 
" Liveries " to be illegal, and his policy in this respect 
was adopted and vigorously pursued by his successor. 
Finally, he limited the rights of Sanctuary, and 
restricted the privilege of Benefit of Clergy, and 
indirectly assisted the dispersion of great estates by 
the Statute of Fines (1488). All these measures 
were intended to prevent the nobles from acquiring 
the position which had been occupied by their 
predecessors. 

For the transgression of any of his statutes the 
same punishment, a heavy fine, was generally in- 
flicted, and from the very outset of his reign Henry 
began to accumulate that vast wealth with which his 
name is associated in the popular imagination. His 
desire for money was insatiable. As has been seen, 
he resumed many of the royal estates and confiscated 
the property of the Yorkists. In addition, he exacted 
to the uttermost all his feudal dues ; his taxation was 
uniformly heavy and caused two brief rebellions, that 
in Cornwall, already mentioned, and another in the 
north, which was less serious, and he resorted to the 
unpopular " Benevolences " in connection with which 



138 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

Cardinal Morton used his " fork with two prongs." 
When it was possible to inflict a fine, not even his 
most faithful supporters were permitted to escape, 
and excuses for inflicting such punishments were 
found in season and out of season. A body of 
informers arose and flourished — pettifogging lawyers, 
whose sole merit was their ingenuity in discovering 
breaches of the law. Even his foreign policy was 
subordinated to his lust for gold. By these means 
Henry became the richest ruler in Europe, and con- 
sequently one of the most powerful, since the 
development of military science had caused money 
to be much more needed in time of war. But- his 
wealth also gave him an overwhelming advantage in 
any contest with his opponents at home, and enabled 
him to give to England that internal peace which she 
so sorely needed. 

It was a more difficult task to secure a like tran- 
quility to Ireland, and yet it was most necessary to 
do so ; for, as has been seen, the neighbouring island 
afforded an excellent base of operations for any 
Yorkist attack upon England, and so long as it was 
in disorder the preservation of the newly-won peace 
at home was very nearly impossible. At the begin- 
ning of his reign Henry found that the royal autho- 
rity in Ireland was restricted to the Pale — that is, the 
district in the immediate neighbourhood of Dublin — 
and to a few ports, such as Waterford and Cork. 
Within these limits the Irish were regarded as 
natural enemies and were liable to be killed at sight 
without penalty ; without them, the country was 
practically independent. The descendants of the 




PhotoX \_Emery Walker. 

MARGARET TUDOR, QUEEN-CONSORT OF SCOTLAND (1489-I541). 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 



t40 THE TUDOR MONARCH\ 

original Norman colonists had " turned Irish," adopt- 
ing the native dress and even changing their names, 
in some cases, to Irish sounding titles, like Bourke 
for De Burgh. Secure in their castles, which were 
fortified by art and protected by nature, these Irish- 
English were a perpetual source of disorder, and 
engaged in a* constant border warfare with the men 
of the Pale. Moreover, owing to the neglect which 
Ireland had experienced since the visit of Richard II., 
the real authority over the English settlements was 
disputed between the two rival houses of FitzGerald 
and Butler. The head of the first family was the 
Earl of Kildare, a vehement supporter of the Yorkist 
cause, who had secured the office of Lord Deputy. 
In opposition to him was the head of the second 
family, the Earl of Ormond, an equally zealous 
partisan of the Lancastrians, whose influence, how- 
ever, had declined owing to the triumph of the House 
of York. Kildare terrorised 'Dublin from his castle 
of Maynooth, and though he was clearly implicated 
in the rebellion of Lambert Simnel, his position was 
so strong that Henry did not dare to attempt to 
punish him. Even when he was able to summon 
him to England to answer certain charges against 
him, the king had to submit to the familiar " thou " 
from the earl, and to treat him with marked con- 
sideration. *' All Ireland cannot rule Kildare," com- 
plained one of the courtiers. " Then Kildare must 
rule all Ireland," replied Henry ; and, as a matter of 
fact, he subsequently did appoint the earl as his 
Viceroy. But it was as Viceroy of a new Ireland. 
The king's second son, afterwards Henry VIII., was 



POYNINGS LAW I4I 

appointed Lieutenant after the collapse of Simnel's 
rebellion, and Sir Edward Poynings, an energetic 
and capable administrator, was sent with the Prince, 
as his deputy. By his vigorous measures he made 
the royal authority felt ; he induced Kildare, as well 
as Ormond, to serve under him ; and, in the Parlia- 
ment of Drogheda, he secured the enactment of two 
measures calculated to repress disorder in the future. 
These formed, together, the famous " Poynings' 
Law," which rendered Ireland absolutely dependent 
on the Royal Council (1495). By the first, no Par- 
liament might be held until the English authorities 
had assented to its summons and approved of the 
measures, which it was proposed to bring forward in 
it. By the second, all the laws then in force in 
England were declared to be binding in Ireland also. 
In other words, the independence of the Irish Parlia- 
ment was destroyed and all power of initiative taken 
from it, while the administration of justice was 
assimilated to that in England. The success of the 
new system was exemplified by the failure of War- 
beck to secure support in Ireland, and, although 
much still remained to be done, Henry deserves 
credit for having effected a certain pacification of the 
country. Even the turbulent Kildare became a loyal 
subject, and the authority of the English Crown was 
displayed in distant Connaught. The royal power 
was raised to the highest point it had yet reached. 

While repulsing the attacks of pretenders and 
restoring order in England and in Ireland, Henry 
was also engaged in important transactions with 
foreign powers. To understand his continental 



142 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

policy it is necessary to review the state of Europe 
at the time of his accession, where the balance of 
power had been changed and old states had been 
developed, or new states created, in the last few 
years. It has been seen already that Edward IV. 
abandoned Burgundy at the Treaty of Pecquigny, 
and left Louis XL to complete the consolidation of 
France in peace. In that work he had been very 
successful, and Brittany alone, of all the semi-inde- 
pendent fiefs, remained unabsorbed. The inheritance 
of Charles the Rash had, at the same time, been par- 
titioned between France, which secured Burgundy 
proper, and the Hapsburgs, to whose dominions the 
Low Countries had been united by the marriage of 
Mary, the heiress of the last Burgundian duke, to 
Maximilian, King of the Romans. The son of this 
union, the Archduke Philip, was in nominal posses- 
sion of the country comprised in the present Holland 
and Belgium, but he was a minor, and the regency 
was exercised by his father and by the Dowager 
Duchess Margaret. Meanwhile, the Holy Roman 
Empire, after its temporary revival under Sigismund, 
had sunk into a state of deplorable weakness. 
Frederic III. was intent only upon the aggrandise- 
ment of his family, and the Imperial authority was 
reduced to the nominal leadership of a miscellaneous 
collection of independent, and occasionally hostile, 
states. In Italy this was the age of " tyrants " 
— Ludovico Sforza ruled in Milan, Lorenzo de 
Medici in Florence, while Naples was in the hands 
of the house of Aragon. Genoa was declining, and 
was practically controlled by Sforza ; Venice, now at 



STATE OF EUROPE 1 43 

the height of her power, was engaged in the task of 
preventing a Turkish conquest of Italy, which had 
been a pressing danger three years before, when the 
Ottomans occupied Otranto. The Papacy had been 
freed from the Great Schism, but the Popes were 
worldly and vicious ; they had lost the spiritual 
ascendancy which they had formerly enjoyed, and 
were embarking upon schemes for the increase of 
their temporal power and the exaltation of their 
families. At present, complete religious unity pre- 
vailed, but the growth of Learning, the revival of 
Literature, and the great devotion to the study of 
classical authors, foreshadowed the approaching up- 
heaval, x^lready the dogmas of the Church were 
disregarded, and the writings of contemporary 
Italians display a tendency toward agnosticism, if 
not towards paganism. But, at the same time, a new 
and powerful Christian state was arising in the south- 
west. The marriage of Ferdinand to Isabella had 
united the two kingdoms of Aragon and Castile, 
and the " Catholic Sovereigns " were making great 
progress towards the reduction of Granada, the last 
stronghold of the Moors, and of the Prophet, in 
Western Europe. That city was the final bar to the 
complete unification of Spain, and it was clear that, 
when its conquest was completed, the kingdom would 
be a new and important factor in the European 
relations. 

Henry was. drawn into the vortex of continental 
politics at the very outset of his reign. Louis XL 
had been succeeded by Charles VIII., the primary 
object of whose policy was the completion of the 



144 '^HE TUDOR MONARCHY 

work begun by his father, by the absorption of 
Brittany. He was favoured in his attempt by the 
condition of that duchy, for Francis II., the former 
protector of the Lancastrian exiles, was now old, and 
his only child was a daughter, Anne. And the 
French were soon given a pretext for aggression. 
Brittany unwisely assisted the rebel Louis, Duke of 
Orleans, against Charles, and* when the revolt was 
crushed the armies of France poured into the duchy 
and captured town after town. In England, the 
success of the French was viewed with comparative 
indifference. Traditional friendship, or a feeling of 
gallantry, induced a few volunteers to cross the 
Channel with Lord Woodville, but even the almost 
total annihilation of this force at the battle of St. 
Aubin, did not rouse the people (1488). Henry was 
averse to war, being naturally of a peaceful dispo- 
sition, and being also hampered by the unrest of 
England and the insecurity of his throne. The 
Bretons were compelled to conclude a disadvan- 
tageous peace with France, and soon afterwards 
Duke Francis died, leaving his daughter, who was 
only twelve years old, to maintain the independence 
of her country. 

But now Henry found a good reason for interfer- 
ing in the affairs of the duchy, even at the risk of a 
war with France. He was above all things anxious 
to secure his dynasty, and in no way could he do 
this more readily than by uniting his family with one 
of the other royal houses of Europe. He selected 
the new Spanish kingdom as the most satisfactory 
ally, and began to negotiate with Ferdinand for a 



THE QUESTION OF BRITTANY 1 45 

marriage between his youthful son, Arthur, and a 
princess of Castile. But the King of Spain demanded 
an adequate return for his consent to such an 
alliance ; the price fixed was the recovery of 
Roussillon and Cerdagne from France ; and, in order 
to secure this, Henry agreed to occupy the attention 
of Charles by a vigorous opposition to the absorption 
of Brittany. Thus it was that he took an active part 
in the defence of the duchy. 

It was now all important to find a husband for 
Anne who should be able to render her effectual 
assistance. Of the many suitors who appeared the 
chief were Maximilian, King of the Romans, and the 
Sieur d'Albret, a nobleman with great local influ- 
ence, while Charles proposed to settle the question by 
marrying the young duchess himself. Henry, after 
first putting forward the Duke of Buckingham, gave 
his support to another candidate, Don Juan of Spain; 
but the only result of the negotiations was to cause 
internal disorder and to help on the French, who 
again invaded Brittany. The Sieur d'Albret deserted 
to Charles ; the English gave but little assistance, 
and Anne made one last effort to preserve her inde- 
pendence by marrying Maximilian by proxy (1490). 
But the impecunious King of the Romans could give 
his wife no help ; Henry and Ferdinand were not 
prepared to fight for him ; and when Charles entered 
the duchy in person Anne gave way. Abandoned 
by all her allies, she repudiated her half-marriage and 
became the wife of the French king, who thus gained 
a complete triumph. The last of the great fiefs was 
thus united with the Crown of France (1491). 

II 



146 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

But Henry could not allow the whole question to 
be settled in this way. Some time before he had 
been entrusted with certain towns in Brittany as a 
guarantee for the pay of such troops as he might 
dispatch for the defence of the duchy, and he was 
unwilling to surrender them without compensation. 
At the same time, he was obliged to act alone. 
Ferdinand, with whom he had, as has been seen, 
concluded an alliance, was concerned only with the 
reduction of Granada, and the recovery of Roussillon 
and Cerdagne. Maximilian was occupied with the 
defence of his hereditary dominions. Against his 
own wish and against the inclinations of his subjects, 
therefore, Henry was compelled to attack France. 
With a great show of determination and with loud 
professions of his intention of conquering " his king- 
dom of France," he crossed the Channel and laid 
siege to Boulogne. But the war was soon ended, 
and a treaty was concluded on very much the same 
terms as that of Pecquigny. By the peace of Etaples 
Henry received a large sum of money under the 
. pretext that it formed the arrears of Edward IV.'s 
pension and covered the expenses of the war ; while 
he abandoned his allies, and Charles disowned 
Warbeck. The English king gained his objects — 
compensation for past expenses and security against 
pretenders, and the union of Brittany with France 
was no longer opposed by England (1493). 

Apart from this brief war, Henry's foreign policy 
proceeded on entirely peaceful hnes, such military 
operations as there were being directed against the 
pretenders. It was by diplomacy that he prevented 



THE SCOTTISH MARRIAGE 1 47 

the three countries hostile to him from injuring him. 
At the very beginning of his reign he had proposed 
a marriage treaty to James III., but the assassination 
of that king put an abrupt end to the negotiations. 
With James IV. Henry's relations were for a time 
very strained, and, as has been seen, Warbeck found 
a refuge and a valuable ally in Scotland. But the 
capture of the pretender led to a renewal of friendly 
intercourse between Edinburgh and London, the 
Spanish ambassador using all his influence to pro- 
mote peace. A treaty was concluded after some 
delay, and was presently cemented by the marriage 
of James IV. to Margaret, the elder daughter of the 
English king (1502). The immediate object of this 
alliance was probably only to secure peace, but it 
led just one hundred years later to the union of the 
two crowns. At the time of the marriage it is said 
that one of Henry's advisers suggested that it might 
lead to the accession of a Scotch king to the throne 
of England, and that the king answered that " The 
greater will draw the lesser " — a prophecy which, if 
really spoken, was amply fulfilled in the reign of James 
I. At present, however, the only result of the marriage 
was an unwonted peace between England and Scot- 
land, which endured for about ten years. 

The other enemies to Henry's peace were Burgundy 
and France, but the course of events upon the Con- 
tinent enabled the English king to secure himself 
against them with very much greater ease. After 
the Treaty of Etaples, Charles VIII. made use of his 
newly-acquired peace at home to engage in the first 
of those Italian expeditions, which formed the most 



148 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

prominent feature in French foreign policy for the 
next fifty years. His rapid and brilliant success in 
the peninsula, culminating in his occupation af 
Naples, little more than six months after his de- 
parture from Lyons, alarmed both Ferdinand and 
Maximilian, now Emperor, as well as the Italian 
states. They formed the " Holy Alliance" (1494), in 
conjunction with the Pope, Venice, and Milan, to 
expel the invaders from the peninsula. But it was 
of vital importance to the allies that Henry should 
not assist Charles, and Ferdinand tried every means 
to induce England to join the league, or at least to 
remain neutral. But to all the arguments of the 
Catholic king and of his special envoy, the penurious 
Dr. Puebla, the English monarch objected that 
Burgundy was hostile to him, and that Warbeck 
continued to find an asylum in Flanders. Ferdinand, 
therefore, brought pressure to bear upon the Emperor 
to induce him to abandon the pretender and the con- 
clusion of the " Intercursus Magnus," coupled with 
the continued progress of the French, eventually 
induced Maximilian to agree to do this. In return, 
Henry entered the " Holy Alliance," but at the same 
time he was careful not to bind himself in any way 
to make war upon Charles, so that his adhesion to 
the league was little more in effect than a declaration 
of neutrality. 

The premature death of the French king restored 
peace to Europe, and led to a renewal of friendly 
relations between England and France. Henry 
turned his attention to the negotiation of matri- 
monial alliances. The last years of the fifteenth 




■^ 



,._^ 


<^ 


-* 


tl: 


in 


^ 


1-^ 




1 


'^1 


M 


►^ 


O 


a: 


■* 


c 



^ 









bio 






^ 



150 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

and the first years of the sixteenth century were 
characterised by the great attention paid to royal 
marriages. The two fortunate aUiances, which after- 
wards resulted in the world-empire of Charles V., 
had made a great impression on the minds of men, 
who saw that by them Spain and the Empire, as well 
as the hereditary dominions of.the Hapsburgs, would 
in all probability pass to one man, and that by the 
mere accident of birth, the son of Philip and Joanna 
would become the ruler of half Europe. And so 
Henry VII. endeavoured during the latter part of 
his reign to form marriage connections which should 
unite England with this coming power. With 
Ferdinand he negotiated a treaty whereby Arthur, 
Prince of Wales, married Katherine of Spain (1501). 
The young husband died within a year of the wed- 
ding, and a serious quarrel occurred between the two 
kings. Ferdinand demanded that the dowry should 
be refunded ; Henry claimed the balance due, and in 
order to secure the money, even proposed to marry 
his daughter-in-law, while he revenged himself upon 
her father by keeping her in a condition of the 
utmost poverty. Eventually, an agreement was 
arranged, and a papal dispensation was obtained to 
enable Katherine to marry her brother-in-law, Henry, 
Duke of York. This marriage, which was destined 
to have most important results, was not actually 
celebrated until after the king's death. 

Meanwhile the death of Elizabeth of York took 
place, and Henry availed himself of his freedom to 
seek eagerly for a second wife. An accident, of 
which he took a somewhat unscrupulous ad- 



HENRYS MARRIAGE SCHEMES I51 

vantage, enabled him to conclude an eminently 
satisfactory treaty. On his way to Spain from 
Flanders, the Archduke Philip, now King of Castile 
in right of his wife, Isabella having died, was wrecked 
near Weymouth, and the English king at once 
summoned him to London. Here he was received 
with great show of courtesy, but he was given to 
understand that he would not be allowed to leave 
the country until he had agreed to make an adequate 
return for Henry's " hospitality." Accordingly, a 
treaty was signed by which Philip, in addition to 
granting great commercial advantages to England, 
and surrendering Edmund de la Pole, agreed to a 
double marriage alliance. His sister, Margaret of 
Savoy, was to become the wife of Henry himself, 
while the young Archduke . Charles, the future 
emperor, should marry Mary, second daughter of the 
English king (1504). Of these two matches, the 
latter was concluded by proxy, but never advanced 
further, while the former was presently abandoned 
altogether. For Philip died not long afterwards, and 
Henry thought that it would be more to his ad- 
vantage to marry Joanna. An embassy was actually 
sent to Spain, though the lady was hopelessly mad, 
but its report was unfavourable, and negotiations 
were again proceeding in reference to Margaret of 
Savoy, when the king of England died at the early 
age of fifty-two. He had enjoyed, on the whole, a 
very successful reign, and though he does not alto- 
gether deserve the panegyric written on him by 
Bacon, yet he was undoubtedly possessed of great 
abilities. An opportunist he certainly was, but his 



152 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

measures were destined to redound to the advantage 
of his country, and to inaugurate an era of hitherto 
undreamt-of prosperity. 

Henry VI 1 1, succeeded to the throne under most 
favourable circumstances. He was young, handsome, 
accompHshed, and personally popular, while the 
wealth, carefully collected by his father, enabled him 
for a time to be extravagant and generous without 
having recourse to extra taxation. His title was 
secure, since the most serious rivals of the Tudor 
dynasty had been executed, and the surviving De la 
Poles were exiles on the Continent. In short, he 
came into the enjoyment of the fruits of his prede- 
cessor's work, without inheriting the unpopularity, 
which the completion of that work had fastened upon 
Henry VII. He was, therefore, able to engage in 
schemes which would have been impossible for his 
father, and to enter upon the fascinating game of 
European politics without dreading that even a slight 
mistake might cost him his throne. As a result, 
there is a certain light-heartedness, a certain lack of 
consistency in his relations with foreign states, which 
makes the early part of his reign, during which these 
foreign relations were the chief concern of the govern- 
ment, peculiar in English history. Henry is depicted 
as " bluff King Hal," a jovial tyrant, and to a certain 
extent his reign bears out this estimate of his 
character. He fights and makes peace and fights 
again, all with a total disregard for any sort of 
principle, with a bland inconsequence which is al- 
most attractive, acting as though war were a pleasant 
game, and as though it did not matter which side he 



WOLSEY 153 

took. And the constant vacillation of his policy 
cannot be altogether attributed to the dark scheming 
of his great minister, for Wolsey had one end in 
view, and, had he been quite supreme, might have 
attained it. But as a matter of fact, he was not quite 
supreme ; and his master was not prepared to for- 
ward his designs, or to adopt any settled course, until 
the attractive face of Anne Boleyn made the divorce 
for some time the aim and end of all his actions at 
home and abroad. 

It is owing to this lack of a settled purpose in the 
royal policy that the earlier part of the reign of 
Henry VIII. derives its chief importance from the 
fact that it saw the rise and fall of the last of the 
great ecclesiastical politicians. Thomas Wolsey, 
Archbishop of York, Bishop of Durham, Chancellor, 
Cardinal, and Legate of the Holy See, affords one of 
the most striking of many examples of the essentially 
democratic character of the mediaeval church — demo- 
cratic, that is, in the possibility which she offered to 
the poorest and meanest of her sons, of rising to be 
the friend of kings and the peer of the noblest of the 
land. Born of humble parents, he rose with incredible 
rapidity to a position of incontestable superiority. The 
private chaplain of Henry VII. became in twelve years 
the second personage in the realm. Endowed with 
vast wealth as the result of his public employments, 
and pensioned moreover by the rival monarchs who 
sought to gain his influence on their behalf, he lived 
in a style of unparalleled magnificence, and, though 
his pride and ostentation offended his would-be 
equals, they appealed powerfully to the people, whom 
they impressed, 



154 ^^-S TUDOR MONARCHY 

Unlike his master, Wolsey had a clear and reason- 
able policy. He aimed at the exaltation of his 
country, and he realised the value of a " Balance of 
Power" in assisting him to gain this end. It was 
his primary object to maintain the peace of Europe 
under the guarantee of England, while, if a war 
broke out, it was his wish to prevent the complete 
triumph of either of the two great rival states of the 
Continent. In the pursuance of this policy he was 
handicapped by the character of Henry and by the 
nature of his own position. The king was at once 
obstinate and capricious, while Wolsey knew well 
that for him to lose the royal favour would be equiva- 
lent to the signature of his own death-warrant The 
policy of England during the years of his supremacy 
was occasionally dictated by him, but his designs 
were crossed or modified by the inconstant character 
of the king. 

It was an appeal to his pride, a hint that his in- 
fluence would be the deciding factor, that first brought 
Henry into the arena of continental politics, and on 
this occasion he was one of the members of the "Holy 
League." The formation of that alliance was the 
outcome of the aggression of Louis XII. and the 
patriotism of Julius II. The conquests of Charles 
VIII. had been lost as rapidly as they had been 
won, but this did not deter his successor from re- 
suming the attempt to unite Naples with the French 
crown. Beginning by conquering the duchy of Milan, 
which he claimed in right of his descent from the 
Visconti at the battle of Novara, he next concluded 
the Treaty of Granada with Ferdinand the Catholic, 




PhotoX \_Einery Walker. 

CARDINAL WOLSEY (? I475-1530). 

Frofn a painting in the N'ational Portrait Gallery. 



156 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

and in conjunction with Spain conquered the king- 
dom of Naples. A quarrel between the allies resulted 
in the expulsion of the French from the south, and 
led Louis to entertain the proposal of the Papacy to 
partition the continental possessions of Venice, as 
he hoped in this way to consolidate his power in the 
north, and forward eventually his designs against 
Ferdinand. The aggression of the Republic, which 
had not spared the patrimony of St. Peter, formfed 
the pretext for the war, and her wealth induced the 
Emperor and Spain, as well as France and Julius, to 
unite against her in the League of Cambray (1508). 
The Venetians bowed before the storm, and sacri- 
ficed the larger part of their possessions on the 
mainland, but the triumph of the allies was the 
undoing of Louis. Elated by the success of his first 
plan, the Pope began to form a fresh combination 
with the object of expelling the French from Italy. 
Into his " Holy League " he quickly succeeded in 
drawing Venice and the Swiss, and after hostilities 
had begun he received a further accession of strength 
by the adhesion of Maximilian and Ferdinand (15 11). 
In order to create a diversion which should divide 
the French forces, he next applied to Henry, and 
easily persuaded the EngHsh king to attack France 
on the west. 

The actual military operations of the war which 
followed were not of great importance. Relying 
upon Ferdinand's promise of support, an army was 
despatched to Southern France, where it was utilised 
by the wily Spaniard in the furtherance of his own 
designs upon Navarre. But after a while the English 



BATTLE OF THE SPURS 1 57 

were disgusted by the selfishness of their ally ; sick- 
ness broke out, and the expedition soon returned 
home, exhausted and disheartened. In the following 
year Henry invaded Artois in person and laid siege 
to Therouenne. An attempt at relief ended in an 
easy victory for the besiegers at Guinegate, the 
French cavalry being seized with an unreasonable 
panic and dispersing so rapidly that the engagement 
was known as the "Battle of the Spurs" (1513). 
The town Shortly afterwards surrendered, and the 
capture of the more important city of Tournay 
followed. But the " Holy League " had accomplished 
its work m Italy ; the allies made peace indepen- 
dently, and a treaty was soon concluded between 
France and England. Louis paid Henry a large 
sum, which was due according to the former arrange- 
ments between the two countries, and married Mary, 
the younger sister of the English king. This 
marriage proved very unfortunate for the bride- 
groom ; he was induced to gratify his young wife 
by indulging in a round of gaieties, to which he had 
not been accustomed, and the violent change in his 
habits led to his death within six months (1515). 
His widow hastened to follow her own inclinations 
and found a second husband in Charles Brandon, 
Duke of Suffolk, her former lover, by whom she 
became the ancestress of the unhappy Lady Jane 
Grey. Henry was, for a time, very angry, but Mary 
was his favourite sister, and he pardoned her after a 
short delay. 

Meanwhile England had been engaged also in a 



158 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

war with Scotland. James IV., who had already 
many grounds of complaint against his brother-in- 
law, was induced by Louis to avail himself of the 
absence of Henry in France to cross the border. 
But the Earl of Surrey proved equal to the task of 
defeating this invasion. He attacked the Scotch at 
Flodden and gained a completely decisive victory ; 
the king, together with the larger part of his nobility, 
fell on the field, and the military force of Scotland 
was almost annihilated (15 13). The crown passed to 
James V., who was a minor, and the regency was 
entrusted to the queen-mother, Margaret, owing to 
the earnest desire of the Scotch for peace with 
England. But her imprudent marriage to Archibald 
Douglas, Earl of Angus, made the regent very un- 
popular ; the Duke of Albany returned from France 
and took over the leadership of the disaffected nobles, 
and a state of anarchy prevailed for some years. 
The French gave considerable support to Albany, 
but their efforts were successfully foiled by Lord 
Dacre, and after a stormy period of some ten years 
Margaret and Angus triumphed. As a result peace 
subsisted between the two countries for eighteen 
years, until the influence of Mary of Guise led her 
husband, James V., to renew hostilities with England 
at the close of Henry's reign. 

On the continent of Europe the accession of 
Francis I. was the signal for the outbreak of a fresh 
war in Italy. By his brilliant victory at Marignano 
he secured the duchy of Milan (15 15), and, on the 
'death of Ferdinand the Catholic, the difficulties of his 
successor, the Archduke Charles, led to a brief truce. 



THE EMPEROR CHARLES V. ' 1 59 

But this was merely the preHminary to a greater 
storm. The two young kings both became candi- 
dates for the Imperial dignity when Maximilian died 
shortly afterwards. Henry also put himself forward, 
but the English envoys soon saw that he had no 
chance of election and were easily persuaded to use 
their influence in favour of Charles. Supported by 
England and by the Elector of Saxony, the King of 
Spain was chosen, and thus acquired, in addition to 
his previous possessions, all the prestige and all the 
vague authority which belonged to the title of 
Emperor (15 19). In regard to the extent of his 
dominions, hereditary and Imperial, he became the 
most powerful monarch that Europe had ever seen — 
at least since the days of his illustrious namesake. 
From his father he inherited the Low Countries and 
the Hapsburg territories ; from his mother, Spain, 
Naples, and Sicily, while as emperor he had a claim 
upon the services of the princes of Germany and an 
ill-defined suzerainty over Italy. Moreover, the dis- 
coveries of Columbus had placed the unexplored 
riches of a New World at the disposal of the 
sovereign of Spain. But Charles had one formidable 
rival in Francis, who, by reason of the superior 
organisation and ' far greater centralisation of his 
state, was able to contend on equal terms with the 
ruler of half Christendom. A conflict between the 
Emperor and France was inevitable, and, in view of 
it, both sovereigns eagerly sought the alliance of 
England. 

At first the interests of Francis appeared likely to 
succeed, but Charles paid a hurried visit to London, 



l6o • THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

and by his address secured the support of Wolsey, 
now at the height of his power. Though Henry 
crossed to France and had the famous interview of 
the " Field of Cloth of Gold " with the French king, 
an alliance, was shortly afterwards concluded with the 
Emperor, by which England engaged to support him 
if attacked (1520). In forming this league Henry 
was actuated by a variety of motives ; he was 
influenced by his relationship to the Emperor, whose 
uncle by marriage he was ; by his wish to emulate 
the exploits of Edward HI. and Henry V. in France ; 
and by his jealousy of the reputation of Francis for 
knightly prowess and gallantry. In addition there 
was the traditional friendship between England and 
the Empire, the old rivalry between England and 
France, the commercial connection with Flanders, 
and the recent alliance with Spain, all of which con- 
tributed to bring about the same result. And, finally, 
the superior political ability of Charles, which gave 
him an ascendancy over the mind of his uncle, must 
not be ignored ; it enabled him to succeed not only 
at this time, but even when he had openly broken 
his promises and flouted Henry's wishes in the 
matter of the divorce in retaining that English 
alliance which was so useful to him with little break. 
The value of this connection to the Emperor was, 
however, negative rather than positive ; it served 
rather to distract the attention of Francis and divide 
his forces than to provide Charles with active help, 
and the military operations of the English were in no 
wise commensurate with the power and reputation of 
Henry. Two expeditions were, it is true, despatched 



FOREIGN POLICY l6l 

to France, but they accomplished nothing noteworthy. 
In the case of the second the promises of the Con- 
stable Bourbon seemed to hold out a possibility of 
great success, but before they could be fulfilled the 
treason of the duke was discovered, and he was 
obliged to take refuge with the Imperial army with- 
out the men whom he had undertaken to bring over 
with him. Meanwhile the ability of Pescara had 
crowned the arms of the Emperor with triumph, and 
now he reached the culminating point of his success 
in the defeat and capture of Francis at Pavia (1525). 
But the rapid progress of the Imperialists alarmed 
the rest of Europe ; men began to fear that Charles 
would make himself dictator of the world and revive 
the obsolete jurisdiction of the Empire. Henry dis- 
covered that his ally was bent upon furthering his 
own cause and that he was not prepared to sacrifice 
his own interests for the benefit of his ally. And a 
coolness thus arose between Charles and England, 
which was already threatening the stability of the 
alliance, when the sack of Rome and the harsh treat- 
ment of the Pope sent a shock through the whole of 
Christendom. The English king immediately entered 
into negotiations with Francis ; a strict alliance was 
concluded between the two monarchs, and in the 
following year England declared war against the 
Emperor, though there were no active operations. 

Indeed, another matter was already occupying the 
attention of the king, which, while it contributed to 
continue the hostility between him and Charles, 
effectually prevented him from indulging in military 
exploits. This matter was the question of the legality 

12 



1 62 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

of his marriage. Henry had never liked Katherine, 
who was devoid of personal beauty and also con- 
siderably older than her husband. He had been 
disappointed in his hope of an heir, and the pre- 
mature death of several children had, perhaps, 
alarmed his naturally superstitious mind. Moreover, 
the question of the succession was really pressing. 
The Princess Mary, the king's only child, was deli- 
cate, and in event of her death there would almost 
certainly be a dispute between the various members 
of the royal house and a danger of a revival of the 
Yorkist party. At the time of the quarrel with 
Charles the question of a divorce was raised privately, 
and Wolsey, though he was not given the king's full 
confidence, was instructed to find means by which 
the marriage might be dissolved. Henry, however, 
did not tell his minister that he had fallen in love 
with Anne Boleyn, a beautiful maid of honour ; or, 
if the Cardinal knew this, he did not know that his 
master proposed to raise her to the position of queen. 
An appeal was therefore addressed to the Pope, 
asking him to sanction a divorce on the ground that 
the bull of Julius H. was invalid. But Clement VH. 
was not in a position to act freely, even if he could 
consistently meet Henry's wishes. Katherine was 
the Emperor's aunt, and Charles let it be clearly 
understood that he would not abandon her. The 
recent sack of Rome had impressed the Pope with 
the strength of the Imperial power, and there was 
also a danger that if he were annoyed the Emperor 
would refrain from opposing, or perhaps even support, 
the Reformation movement, which was making rapid 




Photo] \_Emery Walker. 

ANNE BOLEYN (1507-1536), 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 



164 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

progress in Germany. At the same time Clement 
was equally unwilling to alienate Henry, who had so 
recently appeared as the champion of the Church 
against Luther, and, to increase the difficulty of 
his position, it was contrary to all the traditions of 
the Papacy to revoke a decision once given. He 
sought, therefore, to take refuge in a policy of 
procrastination and to make a show of wishing to 
settle the case, while actually suspending his judg- 
ment in the hope that events might occur which 
should free him from his present embarrassment. 
With these objects in view he despatched Cardinal 
Campeggio to England, and the trial of Katherine's 
case opened before him and Wolsey (1528). But 
just as it seemed possible that a decision would be 
reached Clement suddenly found an excuse to annul 
the whole proceedings and ordered that a new trial 
should be opened at Rome. This was regarded by 
Henry as equivalent to an adverse decision, and 
from that moment the quarrel with the Papacy 
and the Reformation in England really began. At 
present, however, the chief result was the fall of 
Wolsey. 

The great minister had encouraged the king to 
hope for a favourable verdict, and the abortive result 
of the investigation was laid to his charge. Henry 
had already grown tired of the Cardinal, and he 
eagerly took the opportunity of ridding himself of 
an adviser who had ceased to please. Anne Boleyn, 
too, hated Wolsey, because she knew that he was not 
in favour of her exaltation to the throne, and her 
influence was now paramount. The Cardinal fell as 



FALL OF WOLSEV 1 65 

rapidly as he had risen, the Great Seal was taken 
from him within three months after Campeggio's 
departure, his wealth was confiscated, and he was 
on his way to London to answer a series of charges 
under the Statute of Praemunire, when he died at 
Leicester. His death marks the close of the first 
period of Henry's reign and the committal of 
England to a course of hostility to Rome. As has 
been said, he was the last of those great ecclesiastical 
statesmen who figure so largely in the history of 
England, and he was in some ways the greatest. 
His tireless industry, his grasp of affairs, his appre- 
ciation of the changed character of the times, stamp 
him as a man of great ability, but it must be remem- 
bered that he was a determined enemy to political 
liberty, and, while desiring a moral reformation of the 
Church, a vigorous opponent of freedom of thought 
in religious matters. His fall was an advantage to 
the country, as enabling it at last to deliver itself 
from the tyranny of dogma. 

In the period which closed with the fall of this 
great man, the central feature was clearly the vast 
increase of the royal power. After the turmoil of 
the Wars of the Roses there was an universal desire 
for peace, and peace at any price, and this could 
only be satisfied by the establishment of a strong 
executive. The vigorous rule of the Tudors exactly 
suited the needs of the time, and, delighted with the 
new-found rest, the people appeared to grow care- 
less of those ancient liberties which had been so 
dearly bought. Consequently the government of 
England seemed to have been changed ; the king 



1 66 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

seemed to rule without restraint and Parliament to 
exist merely to register the decrees of its master. 
But, as a matter of fact, the so-called " Tudor 
despotism " has no existence in reality. The essence 
of despotic government is the absence of a constitu- 
tion — that is, of any recognised limitations to the 
authority of the ruler and of any body having the 
power to say, " Thus far shalt thou go, and no 
farther." Such unfettered power was acquired about 
this time by the sovereigns of France and Spain, 
who, having triumphed over their nobility, proceeded 
to ruin the free institutions of their respective 
countries. But in England, though the course of 
events was similar up to a certain point, there was 
subsequently a wide divergence, and there is a most, 
remarkable contrast between the policy of the 
Tudors and that of their contemporaries on the 
Continent. Both Henry VII. and his son ruled 
with a strong hand, but they did not assault the 
liberties of their subjects, and the very fact that 
their most illegal acts were formally sanctioned by 
Parliament shows that they recognised the rights of 
that body and the true basis of their own authority. 
In short, though the monarchy was exalted, the 
government of England remained, in the words of 
Judge Fortescue, " not only regal, but political," and 
did not degenerate into that " unnatural " system — 
a tyranny. 

The very circumstances, which contributed to this 
growth of the royal power, led ultimately to the 
triumph of the popular party ; for the chief obstacles 
to the establishment of a strong executive had been 




THE EMPEROR CHARLES V, (150O-I558). 

Frovi an engraving after Sir Anthony Van Dyke. 



1 68 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

the Baronage and the Church, who were also enemies 
to all true liberty, however much it might suit them, 
from time to time, to stand forth as champions of the 
people. As has been already pointed out, the old 
Baronage had been practically exterminated in the 
Wars of the Roses and had been replaced by a new 
nobility, created by the triumphant Yorkists and 
owing its importance to the royal favour. Henry 
VII. appreciated the fact that the great families had 
been the chief source of disorder in the past, and that 
they would be the most dangerous supporters of any 
rebellion, and, as has been seen, his legislation was 
directed to destroy such as survived and to prevent 
the new nobility from acquiring a similar position to 
that enjoyed by their predecessors. His purpose 
was, to a certain extent, accomplished by the constant 
fines and confiscations, which mark his earlier years ; 
by the stern repression of the practices of Livery and 
Maintenance ; by the paucity of his new creations ; 
and by the facilities, which he afforded, for the 
disintegration of large estates. At the same time, 
he was careful to employ churchmen or men of 
middle rank as his chief advisers. Cardinal Morton, 
a devoted Lancastrian, was Chancellor during the 
greater part of his reign ; while prominent in his 
council were Empson and Dudley, men of low birth, 
whose fame depends upon their skill in finding 
excuses for exacting money. They were the heads 
of an efficient secret service, which had been founded 
by Edward IV. and which developed into a formid- 
able support of the royal power under the fostering 
care of the Tudors. But it was the possession of 



GROWTH OF THE ROYAL POWER 1 69 

great wealth which rendered the king capable of 
meeting the most formidable baronial rising with 
assurance of success. The Lancastrians had suffered 
from their extreme poverty, and Edward IV. had 
set the example of accumulating money. Henry 
VII., however, amassed a hoard, in comparison with 
which the resources of his predecessors shrink into 
insignificance. And, at the same time, riches had 
become more and more the true source of success in 
government, for the art of war had undergone con- 
siderable modifications. Even before the Wars of 
the Roses, cannon had played an important part in 
sieges ; while the later battles of the civil war had 
been won by the armies which had the best artillery. 
And, as a natural result, the old type of military force 
became extinct. It was necessary to have men 
skilled in the use of the new weapons, and such skill, 
being only obtainable through long practice, was only 
found in the ranks of the professional soldiers. 
Hence, wealth was more essential than before, when 
any collection of men formed a passable army ; and 
Henry, by accumulating money, was in a position to 
buy the means of quelling any rebellion. At the 
same time, he did not keep any permanent military 
force in his employ, and thus did not secure the chief 
weapon which was used on the Continent for the 
establishment of despotism. Henry VIII. followed 
out his father's policy. He continued to select his 
ministers from the Church ; his first Chancellor was 
Warham, Archbishop of Canterbury, and his second 
Cardinal Wolsey. And though he dissipated the 
wealth which had been so arduously collected, and 



I/O THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

executed Empson and Dudley, he maintained the 
position acquired by Henry VII., and the fact that he 
was able to secure the condemnation and death of 
the Duke of Buckingham, without difficulty and 
without a protest, shows how completely even the 
most powerful noble was at his mercy. Henry VII. 
established the strong monarchy ; his son consolid- 
ated it in his earlier years ; and together they created 
that form of government which subsisted until the 
accession of the House of Stuart. 

But there were limitations upon the power of the 
Tudor monarchs. Without the assistance of a stand- 
ing army, they had not the means of successfully 
defying their subjects, and, moreover, the weakness 
of their title to the throne forced them to adopt a 
popular attitude, especially in the reign of Henry 
VII. They, consequently, did not attempt the des- 
truction of Parliament, and, though that body appears 
as the ready instrument of the Crown, yet the very 
fact that it was used prevented it from losing all 
weight. It even dared, upon one subject, to resist 
the government, and opposed successfully the 
exorbitant demands of Wolsey in the matter of 
taxation. The Cardinal went in person to the House 
of Commons and required the immediate voting of 
i^8oo,ooo for the war with France, but the Speaker, 
Sir Thomas More, protested that the members were 
overawed by the presence of so great a man and 
induced him to withdraw. Thereupon, a protest was 
registered against the intrusion of Wolsey, and the 
Commons were with difficulty induced to vote about 
half the original sum, the payment to be spread over 



RESISTANCE TO TAXATION I71 

four years (1523). Even then the opposition was so 
strong that a member expressed his doubts as to 
whether it would not cost the king " the goodwills and 
true herts of his subjects, ... a ferre grettir treasure 
for a king than gold or silver." A subsequent 
attempt to exact a forced loan was resisted through- 
out the country. It was openly asserted that the 
levying of taxes without consent of Parliament was 
illegal, and the proposal was dropped in favour of a 
Benevolence, the legality of which was upheld by the 
judges on the ground that the practice had only been 
forbidden during the reign of an usurper. These two 
incidents show that the spirit of liberty was dormant, 
but not dead ; that, when the strong monarchy ceased 
to be necessary, it would probably also cease to exist ; 
that the power of the Tudors mainly depended for its 
durability upon the popularity of the reigning 
monarch ; and, in short, that there was a limit which 
the Crown would transgress at its peril. 

It has been already pointed out that the Church 
at this time was reduced to a condition of depend- 
ence on the Crown, and that she relied upon the royal 
authority to prevent the confiscation of her wealth, as 
she had lost both the affection and respect of the 
people. That dependence was now all the more 
marked and all the more real, since the New Learning 
had spread to England also, bringing with it an 
increased distrust of the established religion and a 
tendency to question the dogmas, which had hitherto 
been received with implicit faith. To Grocyn belongs 
the honour of being the first to lecture upon Greek at 
Oxford ; that is, upon the old authors, whose manu- 



1^2 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

scripts had been so recently re-introduced into 
Europe, for there had long been a certain amount of 
study of Aristotle and the language of Athens had 
never been totally neglected. He was followed by 
Linacre and Colet at the same University ; but the 
light shone weakly until the accession of Henry VIII. 
The new king was an enthusiastic patron of scholars, 
and with his countenance the New Learning made 
rapid strides. Erasmus, who had been somewhat 
coldly treated by Henry VII., returned to England 
and for a time occupied the newly founded chair of 
Greek at Cambridge. Colet, now Dean of St. Paul's, 
revolutionised education by the foundation of St. 
Paul's School ; and seven years after the accession of 
Henry VIII., Sir Thomas More, one of the most 
accomplished of all the Renaissance scholars, 
published the " Utopia " — the chief monument of the 
New Learning in England (15 15). Under the guise 
of an account of an imaginary republic, he pointed 
out the abuses of the time in Church and State, 
advocating toleration, increased education, and greater 
distribution of wealth. He denounced the idleness of 
the rich and preached the dignity of labour, insisting 
that the object of legislation should be to benefit the 
many, rather than the few, and propounding ideals, 
which have not been realised even at the present day. 
Indeed, throughout the " Utopia" there is a spirit of 
liberalism, far in advance of the time at which it was 
written, but bound to influence men's minds, if only 
by its daring originality. 

With the pure learning, not only the king but also 
Wolsey and most of the leading ecclesiastics had 




SIR THOMAS MORE (1478-1535). 
From an old engraving after the enamel by Holbein. 



174 "-THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

much sympathy ; but with the theological specula- 
tions, which resulted from it, they had none. A year 
after the publication of More's immortal work, Martin 
Luther entered his famous protest against the abuses 
of the Roman court, and began the Reformation on 
the Continent. Favoured by several of the princes of 
the Empire, and protected by the Elector of Saxony, 
the great reformer grew more and more independent ; 
passing from an attack upon the vices, to an assault 
upon the doctrines, of the Church. Having burned 
the papal bull which condemned him as a heretic, 
he defied the assembled dignitaries of the Empire at 
the diet of Worms, and thenceforward his doctrines 
spread with enormous rapidity, while from his retreat 
at Wartburg he poured forth his tracts and directed 
the course of the movement which he had begun. 
Such a complete revolution, which seemed destined 
to destroy the whole fabric of the existing Church, 
naturally aroused much attention in England. The 
doctrines of Wycliff, which had been almost forgotten, 
had already been revived, and a carefully organised 
society, " The Association of Christian Brothers," 
spread them among the people. Ever since the 
accession of Henry VHL, prosecutions for heresy 
had been frequent, and Qolet himself had narrowly 
escaped condemnation ; while the abuses of the 
ecclesiastical courts had been fearlessly exposed, not 
without some signs of royal approval. And now the 
doctrines of Luther began to take hold upon the 
people ; and as they were bolder and clearer the 
movement became more formidable. But it was 
regarded with alarmed disapproval by the governing 



ENGLAND AND LUTHER 175 

class and by the nobles, lay and spiritual. Henry, 
who was proud of his theological attainments, 
published, early in the controversy, his " Assertio 
Septem Sacramentorum adversus Martinum 
Lutherum " (1521), which provoked a somewhat 
scurrilous reply from the Reformer, and which led 
Leo X. to grant to his royal supporter the title of 
" Defender of the Faith." More's attachment to the 
beliefs of his childhood proved greater than his 
affection for toleration, and he, too, joined in the 
opposition to the " new heresy." But one man alone 
seems to have fully appreciated the true meaning of 
the Reformation and to have realised the . danger 
with which the Church was brought face to face. 
Wolsey, though at one with the king in his adherence 
to the old faith, saw that unless there could be some 
improvement in the moral condition of the clergy 
from within, that improvement would come from 
without, and the anger aroused by the vices of 
individuals would lead to the destruction of the 
institution. And, indeed, the corruption of that 
institution was so great as almost to warrant its 
abolition. The vicious example of such Popes as 
the infamous Alexander VI. had been all too faith- 
fully followed by the subordinate clergy, and in most 
cases the best that could be said of the spiritual 
rulers of England was that they were too much 
occupied in politics to be immoral. So notorious 
was the condition of many of the religious houses, 
that Cardinal Morton had obtained a bull authorising 
a limited measure of suppression, and he was obliged 
to roundly rebuke one abbot for his scandalous con- 



iy6 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

duct. Wolsey resolved to attempt to improve the 
condition of the Church, rfe ordered an investiga- 
tion and, as a result, diverted the revenues of some of 
the smaller monasteries to more useful purposes, 
founding, for example, his Cardinal's College at 
Oxford largely from the moneys thus obtained. 
Even his desire for the Papacy may be partially 
attributed to his wish to use the immense power, 
which still belonged to the Pope, for the purification 
of the Church. But his reforms were ineffective and 
his fall cut short his work. The result of his labours 
was but slight, and possibly only led to increased 
attention being paid to the existing abuses and so to 
the hastening on of the Reformation. 

Meanwhile the class to which the " new religion " 
more especially appealed had been growing in 
strength and, despite the existence of much distress, 
the general condition of the people continued to 
improve. The period was one of an agrarian revolu- 
tion. England was gradually abandoning tillage in 
favour of the more lucrative employment of sheep 
farming. And this change naturally involved much 
immediate misery ; for the care of the large flocks 
could be undertaken by one or two men, where 
formerly many had been required to plough and sow 
and reap. In addition, the fierce competition, which 
thus arose, was intensified by the immigration of 
numbers of aliens, who were so hated that many riots 
resulted in various parts of the country. And the 
distress was not confined to the rural districts. The 
older towns suffered from the rise of new centres of 
industry ; villages, like Birmingham, began to grow 



COMMERCIAL PROGRESS lyj 

into important places, since the traders left their 
houses and settled elsewhere in order to avoid the 
tyranny of the gilds. And upon all fell the heavy 
taxation of the Tudors, which, though ultimately 
beneficial in that it made the preservation of order 
possible, was a great evil at the time. But there was 
much good as well as much bad in the state of the 
country. The gradual breaking up of the craft gilds, 
which steadily continued, encouraged manufacturers 
by freeing them from the artificial restrictions under 
which they had previously laboured, and a flourishing 
export trade in cloth with Germany arose during this 
period. Still more beneficial was the increased 
interest in commerce displayed by the government. 
As has been seen, the Yorkist kings encouraged trade 
and the Tudors followed their example. Edward IV. 
was a merchant prince, Henry VII. enrolled himself 
in the livery company of the Merchant Taylors, and 
the royal countenance thus given to commerce tended 
to lead to greater attention being paid to it by their 
subjects. Even the final adoption of the Mercantile 
System was not altogether harmful at that time. A 
rising industry does, perhaps, require some measure 
of protection, and though the Navigation Laws, 
which insisted upon confining trade to native traders, 
were subsequently wholly baneful in their effect, they 
probably served at the time to encourage English 
shipbuilding and English commerce. Alien com- 
petition is most excellent when once the native 
industry has been established ; but there is a danger 
that it may kill it in its infancy. In their foreign 
policy, also, the Tudors both consciously and un- 

13 



178 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

consciously favoured the growth of commerce. By 
their treaties and ahiances they secured great advan- 
tages for English trade, and the profitable connection 
with Flanders was made more profitable by the 
" Intercursus Magnus " and " Intercursus Malus " 
under Henry VII., and by the union with Charles V., 
under his successor. And the continued abstention 
from military expeditions, at least on any large scale, 
furthered the interests of the commercial classes. • 

But more than anything else, the great discoveries 
of the closing years of the fifteenth century gave a 
tremendous impetus to commerce and to mercantile 
enterprise. Vasco da Gama and Columbus opened 
up new trade routes and penetrated to strange lands, 
which had hitherto been regarded as existing merely 
in the minds of dreamers. And while, in very truth, 
a " New World " was added to the Old, the art of 
navigation was revolutionised. Mariners ceased to 
creep along by the coast ; they boldly pushed out 
into the ocean and braved the dangers of the deep 
with a new courage. This was the result of the 
exploits of the great navigators, who were the first 
to trust implicitly to the guidance of the compass. 
And now there arose in England a class of merchant 
adventurers, the prototypes of the Elizabethan sea- 
men, who made long voyages, and extended the field 
of English trade beyond its old limits of the Baltic 
on the one hand, and the Levant on the other. Before 
long there arose also the great Chartered Companies, 
to which the foundation of the Colonial Empire may 
most properly be traced. 

To commercial success there was, however, one 



I80 THE TUDOR MONARCHY 

great obstacle — the prevalence of piracy. It has 
already been seen that the Yorkist kings attempted 
its suppression, and one clause in the " Intercursus 
Magnus " was directed to the same object. But the 
only way in which the evil could be really met was 
by an increase in the naval power of England, and 
so it was that the Tudors in their zeal for commerce 
turned their attention to the formation of a strong 
fleet. Since the time of Edward III. the history of 
the English navy had been little more than a shame- 
ful record of weakness and inefficiency. There 
were few ships, either belonging to the government, 
or capable of being used, and such as there were 
but poorly constructed. With Plenry VII., however, 
a better state of things began, and that king fully 
deserves the title of " Father of the English Navy." 
Since his own subjects were deplorably ignorant of 
the art of shipbuilding, he imported Genoese work- 
men to instruct them, and by their labour the famous 
"Great Harry," the first real English warship, was 
constructed, which was the model ship for fifty years, 
and marks an epoch in the history of naval archi- 
tecture in England. In all he collected a fleet of 
fifty-seven vessels, and thus established the nucleus 
of the present Royal Navy. As yet, the advance 
was not great; for, until the time of Henry VIII., 
arrows were the principal missiles used, and, though 
cannon were common abroad, they were used by the 
English mainly " to terrify the enemy with the noise 
and smoke." Henry VIII. continued his father's 
work and added more ships to the fleet, causing a 
second " Great Harry " and the ill-fated " Mary 



NAVAL ACTIVITY l8l 

Rose " to be built. Henceforward, indeed, England 
was never without a navy, and the encouragement 
afforded to shipbuilding led to a great increase in the 
number and to a great improvement in the quality of 
English ships. 

And while such measures, by encouraging com- 
merce, enriched the middle class, and consequently 
increased its importance, the care with which the 
Tudors revived and fostered the local courts con- 
tributed in no small measure to organise the future 
popular party and to fit it for the coming struggle. 
It is most important to realise that the true basis of 
national liberty is local freedom. Local government 
preceded Parliament, and the assembly of estates 
was merely in reality the concentration of shire- 
moots. When local free institutions flourish, there is 
general liberty and Parliament is strong ; the pros- 
perity of the head depends upon that of the members. 
During the civil war the machinery of local govern- 
ment had declined ; but under the Tudors it was 
revived and made better by stricter organisation. 
This work, which was not the least important under- 
taken by the sovereigns of this period, was begun 
under Henry VH. and steadily progressed until its 
completion by Elizabeth. And thus the so-called 
despotism had a great and indeed the chief share in 
forming that party which was to furnish the op- 
position to the Stuarts and defeat the attempt to 
found an absolute monarchy. By the time of the fall 
of Wolsey the establishment of good order had been 
accomplished by the strengthening of the executive, 
and the attention of England had been directed 



l82 



THE TUDOR MONARCHY 



finally to the pursuit of commerce. In the following 
periods it will be seen how a great religious move- 
ment spread over the country and led to a truer 
freedom than had ever been known before, and how 
as a result of this England attained to a higher 
position among the nations of the world, and, seeking 
an outlet for her new-found energy, entered upon 
that career of colonial expansion which continues to 
the present day. 




VII 



THE REFORMATION 



(1529-1558) 



With the fall of Wolsey the Reformation in 
England really began. The king was still absorbed 
in his desire for a divorce, and it was clear that he 
would ultimately break with the Papacy upon this 
point, since he had already abandoned a minister 
whom he had trusted for so long to the vengeance of 
Anne Boleyn, and since nothing could be more 
certain than that the Pope would not give way. And 
there arose two parties — the " Conservatives," who 
clung to the old idea of a united Christendom, and 
were anxious to maintain at least a spiritual, if not a 
political, connection with Rome ; and the Reformers, 
who were themselves divided into the supporters of 
Luther, and the more moderate section who shrank 
from the violent breach which German Protestantism 
necessitated. Henry himself was not yet convinced 
of the logical conclusion of his own quarrel with 
Clement, as is shown by his appointment of Sir 

Thomas More, the leader of the "Conservatives," to 

183 



184 THE REFORMATION 

the Chancellorship vacated by Wolsey ; but the in- 
genuity of Cranmer presently led to the triumph 
of the opposite party. That churchman suggested 
that after all the Pope was not competent to decide 
the question of the divorce, and that the matter 
properly fell within the jurisdiction of a general 
council only, or, failing this, should be referred to the 
Universities of Europe. The latter course was 
adopted, and eventually resulted in an open verdict. 
But as Henry was able to say that the unfavourable 
opinions had been given from fear of the Emperor, 
the desired object was gained, and Cranmer, now 
archbishop, was able to pronounce a divorce. 
Meanwhile the famous " Reformation Parliament " 
(1529- 1 536) had assembled, and the work of destroy- 
ing the union with Rome was progressing rapidly. 

For though Henry had found a way out of his 
(difficulty, he was by no means reconciled with the 
Pope. He was possibly anxious to revenge himself 
upon Clement, but it is more likely that his earlier 
anti-Papal measures were intended to terrify the 
court of Rome into submission. It was only when 
all hopes of an accommodation had disappeared that 
he finally severed the connection between England 
and the Papacy, and it is possible that even then he 
was carried further than he had intended to go by his 
new chief minister, Thomas Cromwell. That able, if 
unscrupulous, man had been in the service of Wolsey 
and had attracted the king's notice by the courage 
with which he stood by his master in the hour of his 
distress. After the final fall of the Cardinal he was 
taken into the royal service, where his capacity for 




THOMAS CROMWELL, EARL OF ESSEX. 

By Holbein, probable date about 1^37. Picture is now at 

Tyttenhanger Park, and is reproduced by permission 

of the Countess of Caledon and Messrs. Goupil. 



1 86 THE REFORMATION 

business and his industry soon led to his promotion. 
He was really responsible for the Acts of the Reforma- 
tion Parliament, or at least for such of them as were 
especially in the direction of absolute severance from 
Rome and the adoption or toleration of Lutheran 
doctrines. In the initial measures of that assembly 
men of all parties were able to take part, for the 
first session was devoted to a reform of those great 
ecclesiastical abuses which were reprobated even by 
the most conservative. The excessive fees charged 
by the Church courts, which had the sole jurisdiction 
in probate and matrimonial law, were reduced ; the 
clergy were forbidden to engage in trade, and the 
practices of non-residence and of pluralities were 
checked by absolute prohibition. But the following 
six years, during which the same Parliament continued, 
saw the attack upon clergy and Pope alike grow in 
strength. The second session was marked by that 
most extraordinary perversion of the constitution, the 
pardon of the whole realm by act of parliament for 
its breach of the statute of Praemunire by its re- 
cognition of the legatine authority of Wolsey. The 
clergy were heavily fined and compelled to recognise 
the king as the supreme head of the Church, though 
at present permitted to salve their consciences with 
the restrictive clause, " so far as the law of Christ 
will allow." The laity were included in the pardon, 
at the desire of the Commons, who feared that 
otherwise they might be called upon to purchase a 
similar forgiveness at a later date, and so, not only 
was the undoubted prerogative of the king — the 
dispensing power — apparently thought insufficient 



THE REFORMATION PARLIAMENT 1 8/ 

for such an occasion, but the nation, through its 
representatives, pronounced its own absolution for 
a breach of the law — a thing absolutely without 
parallel in the history of this or any other country. 
The fear, which seems to have been instilled into 
the minds of the clergy by the fact that they had 
been forced to obtain such a pardon enabled the 
more advanced party to proceed more rapidly. In 
quick succession a series of blows was dealt to Papal 
authority. The Pope was deprived of the first-fruits 
of benefices, which were subsequently annexed to 
the Crown ; appeals to Rome were prohibited ; the 
ecclesiastical courts were brought under royal control 
by the Act of Submission of the Clergy, by which the 
enforcement of canons was made dependent upon the 
assent of the king ; the nomination of bishops was 
entrusted to the Crown by the institution of the 
conge delire ; the payment of Peter's pence was 
abolished ; and, finally, the Royal Succession Act 
was passed. Thisjn effect completed the separation 
from Rome ; for the oath required under it neces- 
sitated an admission that the marriage with Anne 
Boleyn was valid, and thus tacitly denied the papal 
power of dispensation. In the following session the 
Act of Supremacy declared Henry to be the supreme 
head of the Church and omitted the previous saving 
clause, while during the next year the Pope replied 
with a bull of deposition, maintaining the legitimacy 
of the marriage with Katherine, which had been 
already declared ; and the Commons, as a result of 
Cromwell's commission of inquiry, dissolved the 
smaller monasteries, the larger houses sharing the 
same fate four years afterwards. 



1 88 THE REFORM ATION 

Into a detailed discussion of the justice or injustice 
of this last measure it is not possible to enter here, 
but a few tentative remarks upon it are necessary. 
It may be premised that the issue has been somewhat 
obscured by those writers who have regarded it as a 
violation of the rights of property since it is obviously 
permissible for Parliament to confiscate even private 
possessions for the good of the state, and much more 
so to apply the revenues of a corporate body, which 
has ceased to do good work, to some other public 
purpose. The real question is whether the mon- 
asteries were or were not still valuable to the nation 
at large. It may be regarded as certain that the 
report of the commission of inquiry exaggerated the 
vices and follies of the monks, though it did not 
invent them, but it is none the less true that the time 
for the abolition of monastic institutions as they then 
existed had come. In the dark ages the patient toil 
of the cloister, however misdirected at times, had 
served to keep the lamp of learning alight, and 
humanity owes a very real debt to the mediaeval 
monks, but now the bright day of the Renaissance 
had dawned, and the work of the monasteries had 
ceased to be necessary or even beneficial to mankind. 
A vast amount of wealth was devoted to the main- 
tenance of a proportionately small number of men in 
comparative idleness ; their very charity tended to 
pauperise and to encourage the growing class of 
" sturdy beggars," and their learning was to a great 
extent obsolete and futile. Upon these grounds it 
will be recognised by impartial minds that the dis- 
solution of the monasteries was justifiable, while, at 



MORE AND FISHER 1 89 

the same time, it may be regretted that many 
valuable specimens of mediaeval architecture perished, 
and that the confiscated wealth was not all applied 
to a more useful purpose than the enriching of the 
king and his favourites.^ 

The rapid progress of reform had not been due to 
the entire sympathy of the nation. On the contrary, 
there had been very considerable opposition, formed 
by the union of the remnants of the Yorkist party 
and the more extreme supporters of the old regime. 
The ravings of an epileptic serving-maid were con- 
verted into prophecies, uttered under the direct 
inspiration of the Holy Spirit, by the zeal of the 
clergy, and the Nun of Kent, as she was styled, 
became the centre of a great conspiracy, until 
Cromwell caused her to be executed (1534). More 
respectable victims were soon sacrificed. Fisher, the 
learned and kindly Bishop of Rochester, who had 
been imprisoned on the ground of his complicity 
in the recent plot, and Sir Thomas More, suffered 
death, as the result of their refusal to take the oath 
required by the Act of Supremacy, while the monks 
of the Charter-house were arrested and many of them 
executed for the same reason (1535). After this, 
insurrections, either really or professedly in favour of 
the old Church, broke out in various parts of Henry's 
dominions. But the value of the strong monarchy^ 
was exemplified, and the vigorous measures of the 

^ It is true that some part of the confiscated wealth was otherwise 
employed. Six new bishoprics were founded and some colleges re- 
ceived larger endowments ; but, generally speaking, the property was 
either retained by Henry or distributed among his courtiers. 



190 THE REFORMATION 

king soon quelled all resistance. Ireland, which had 
been in its normal state of unrest since the accession 
of Henry, was now cowed into submission. The 
turbulent Geraldines were practically exterminated, 
and the introduction of cannon into Irish warfare 
enabled the royal army to destroy the hitherto 
impregnable strongholds of the nobility (1536). In 
England the most serious rebellion, the Pilgrimage of 
Grace, broke out in the north, and for various reasons 
was joined by men of all classes (1536). The 
ascendancy of Cromwell had angered the nobles, 
whose pride could not bear the rule of a low-born 
man ; the Statute of Uses alienated the landowners, 
as tending to prevent them from making provision 
for their children, other than the eldest ; the 
destruction of the smaller monasteries, which had 
just been accomplished, was a source of discontent to 
the poor ; and the Protestant character of the recently 
published " Ten Articles " had alarmed the whole 
population of the intensely conservative north. The 
rising assumed dangerous proportions, and, as the 
king had already rejected a petition emibodying these 
grievances, thousands flocked to the banner of " the 
five wounds of Christ" The nobles either held aloof 
or openly joined the rebels, but the government 
secured the dispersal of the insurgents by a promise 
of a pacification, and then, finding a pretext in some 
renewed disturbances, punished them with a heavy 
hand. "You shall cause," wrote Henry to his 
general, the Duke of Norfolk, " such dreadful execu- 
tion to be done upon a good number of the 
inhabitants of every town ... as they may be a 




THOMAS CRANMER, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (1489-1556), 
Froin an old engraving after the portrait at Lambeth Palace. 



192 THE REFORMATION 

fearful spectacle to all other hereafter." The ring- 
leaders were all put to death, and a further rebellion 
in the West led to the execution of the leaders of the 
Yorkist party — the Marquis of Exeter and Lord 
Montague, the heads of the families of Courtenay and 
De la Pole. The relentless severity of Henry proved 
effectual ; there were no more rebellions as long as he 
was on the throne. 

Although, however, active resistance was thus 
ended, the reactionary party shortly afterwards 
gained a complete triumph. Henry had never been 
really anxious for anything more than political 
separation from Rome, and any measures which 
appeared to imply doctrinal change may be ascribed 
either to a temporary political necessity, the danger 
from Charles V., or to the influence of his advisers. 
The death of Katherine and the execution of Anne 
Boleyn had been followed by the resumption of 
friendly relations with the Emperor, and the king 
was now able to prove his real " orthodoxy." The 
Ten Articles had been vague in their phraseology, 
and had been subscribed by both parties. They 
were now replaced by the Six Articles, which, while 
not qualifying the royal supremacy, definitely 
affirmed the cardinal points of the " old religion," 
insisting upon a belief in Transubstantiation, celibacy 
of the clergy, the observance of vows of chastity, 
communion in one kind only, private masses and 
auricular confession (1539). This declaration of 
doctrine remained in force until Henry's death, and, 
while Catholics were executed for maintaining the 
supremacy of the Pope, a like fate befel Protestants 



FALL OF CROMWELL 1 93 

who refused to confess the dogma of Transubstantia- 
tion. 

Soon afterwards, Cromwell's ascendancy came to 
an end. He had constantly endeavoured to commit 
Henry to a definite party in the continental struggle, 
and he now negotiated a Protestant alliance. On 
the death of Jane Seymour, he persuaded the king to 
marry Anne, daughter of the Lutheran Duke of 
Cleves. But the lady proved to be unacceptable to 
the king, and Henry, who was already tired of 
Cromwell, seized the excuse to rid himself of him. 
The minister, like Wolsey before him, had no 
popularity upon which to fall back. He had 
alienated every class, except, perhaps, a few extreme 
Reformers, and his overthrow was hailed with general 
delight. A Bill of Attainder was passed, and he was 
executed (1540). Henry had already repudiated 
Anne of Cleves ; he now married Catherine Howard, 
niece of the Duke of Norfolk, the chief champion of 
the old faith, and the reaction appeared to be 
complete. But the English Bible was retained, and 
a tendency to make some concessions to the 
Reformers was evidenced by the publication, under 
royal authority, of the " Necessary Doctrine and 
Erudition of a Christian Man." 

Wars with Scotland and France occupied the 
closing years of the reign. It was one of Henry's 
favourite schemes to effect the union of England and 
Scotland by a marriage treaty, but James V. had 
preferred a French alliance and had married Mag- 
dalen of Valois, and, on her death, Mary of Guise. 
This formed the principal ground of quarrel between 



194 ^^^ REFORMATION 

the two countries, and after some preliminary 
fighting on the border, Norfolk invaded Scotland. 
James collected an army, but it was defeated by a 
few local troops at Solway Moss (1542) and the king 
died of a broken heart, leaving an eight days' old 
child, the ill-fated Mary Stuart, to succeed him. The 
anarchy which followed prevented the Scotch from 
continuing the war, and Lord Hertford burnt 
Edinburgh and ravaged the country without opposi- 
tion. Meanwhile, England had once more joined 
Charles in his contest with Francis. A great 
partition scheme was arranged by the allies, though 
the only result was the capture of Boulogne by 
Henry (1544). The Emperor presently made a 
separate peace, and the French prepared to revenge 
themselves by an invasion of England. The Isle of 
Wight was ravaged, while the English were defeated 
before Boulogne, but the operations were indecisive, 
and a treaty was soon concluded between all the 
belligerents. The peace was undoubtedly hastened 
on by the fact that Henry was dying, for the 
question of the regency became all important. A 
violent contest between Norfolk and Hertford, the 
leaders of the rival parties, took place during the 
last year of the reign, and ended, almost on the day 
of the king's death, in the triumph of the latter. 
The Earl of Surrey, the duke's son, was beheaded, 
and it was on the very day fixed for the father's 
execution that Henry breathed his last (1547). 

In forming any estimate of the character of 
Henry VIII., it is necessary to break through the 
ordinary rule of history and to separate the man from 



CHARACTER OF HENRY VI U. 1 95 

the king. As a man, he was almost wholly bad ; he 
was the slave of his passions, and those passions 
were violent ; he was cruel, vain, and licentious, and 
his personal courage was, perhaps, the . solitary 
redeeming virtue. Such accomplishments as he 
possessed disappeared with his youth ; his boasted 
learning was but slight. As a king, however, he 
presents a different aspect. Able, like all the Tudors, 
he was a strong ruler, and despite the fact that some 
of his acts Were tyrannical, he never attempted to 
establish ^ despotism ; for his intense passion for 
legality saved him from the reproach of being justly 
called an unconstitutional ruler. Everything which 
he did Was sanctioned by the estates of the realm ; 
his marriage with Jane- Seymour, for example, was, 
if the expression may be used, authorised by 
Parliament, and even the prerogative of pardon was 
exercised through the same body, which granted him 
also release from his debts and gave to royal pro- 
clamations the force of law. And, though he probably 
knew beforehand that all his wishes would be 
readily carried out, the mere recognition of the 
authority of Parliament prevents his government 
from being rightly called an absolute monarchy. 
Abroad, too, he enabled England, despite his 
constant changes in policy, to take a much more 
prominent place in the council of nations, though it 
is an exaggeration to say that he made her the 
arbitress of Europe. She did not hold the balance 
between Francis and Charles, but her alliance became 
valuable, and she ceased to be merely a satellite 
of Spain, by the adoption of an independent, if 



196 THE REFORMATION 

inconsistent, policy. Charles I. has been called a 
good man but a bad king ; the converse is true of 
Henry VIII., and in the most important relation of 
life, therefore, he was a good man. 

As soon as Henry VIII. was dead the country was 
given an opportunity to realise the advantages of his 
strong rule, and the disasters and disorder of Edward 
VI.'s reign, though due in some measure to the bad 
financial system of his predecessor, afford the best 
apology for the severity of the late king. Henry had 
attempted, in his will, to entrust the government, 
during his son's minority, to his executors, a neutral 
body in which all parties were represented. But this 
arrangement was abandoned ; the Earl of Hertford, 
who was presently created Duke of Somerset, was 
declared Lord Protector, and the proposed regents 
were absorbed in the Council. Somerset had been 
the most successful soldier, the most prominent man, 
in the closing years of the late reign, but he was not 
qualified for his present post. He was a visionary, 
and though many of his ideas were good, he 
neglected the means whereby his end might be 
secured. He was impatient, and embarked hastily 
upon projects which he was unable to bring to a 
successful conclusion. And, at a time of great 
difficulty, when a strong ruler was needed, he was 
too gentle, or too scrupulous, to destroy his enemies. 
Once, indeed, he was severe ; his own brother was 
executed for treason under his rule, and though the 
punishment was probably just, the severity was 
ill-timed. Finally, Somerset was a Reformer, and 
his religious innovations were unacceptable to the 




EDWARD SEYMOUR, DUKE OF SOMERSET (? I506-I552). 

From a painting now in the possession of Sir E. Verney^ Bart., at Rhianva. 



198 THE REFORMATION 

majority of Englishmen. With such a ruler, success 
was impossible, but the Protector must not be 
wholly condemned. His faults were generally 
amiable, and it was his misfortune to be called upon 
to rule England at a time to which his ideas were 
unsuited, and when no one, perhaps,, could have met 
with a full measure of success. 

It has been already mentioned that one of Henry's 
wishes was to bring about the union of the crowns 
of England and Scotland, and he had proposed a 
marriage between Mary and Edward. But the 
antipathy between the two nations led to strong 
opposition to the match. The brief triumph of the 
Anglophil party, after the murder of Cardinal 
Beaton, was followed by a restoration of the French 
ascendancy in Scotland, and when Somerset went to 
the help of his friends, he was victorious, indeed, at 
Pinkie, but, by his very victory, increased the 
hatred for England (1547). The young queen was 
sent to France, where she married the Dauphin, the 
future Francis H., and, in its immediate results, the 
Protector's policy failed. He had, however, patron- 
ised the Protestant party in Scotland, and, in this 
way, did something to forward English interests in 
that country. He was unfortunate, also, in the rest 
of his foreign policy. Boulogne was closely invested 
by the French and held with difficulty, while lack of 
men and money prevented the giving of any effectual 
help to the German Protestants now engaged in the 
Smalkaldic war. At home the stability of his govern- 
ment was threatened first by his own brother. Lord 
Seymour of Sudeley, whom he caused to be put to 



SOCIAL DISTRESS 1 99 

death (1548), and then by the ambition of Dudley, 
Earl of Warwick ; while the violent partisanship, 
which characterised the Protector's religious policy, 
caused widespread dissatisfaction, increased by the 
sacrilege alleged to have been committed in the 
construction of Somerset House. 

But it was the widespread social distress which 
eventually overthrew the government The debase- 
ment of the coinage, begun under Henry VHI. and 
continued under Edward VI., and the prevalence of 
piracy, which revived with the weakening of the 
executive, caused prices to rise. The new landowners, 
successful merchants who had purchased estates, 
insisted upon the payment of rents and evicted 
defaulters, whereas the old nobility and the monas- 
teries had been gentle with their tenants in this 
respect. And the continued increase of sheep farm- 
ing threw many men out of work, while they could 
no longer seek refuge from starvation in the charity 
of the religious houses. At last the misery, resulting 
from these various causes, became unbearable, and 
insurrections broke out all over the country, taking 
the form of a demand for religious reaction in the 
Western, and for the destruction of enclosures in the 
Eastern, counties. Somerset was placed in a 
difficult position ; for in his heart he sympathised 
with the rebels in their desire for social reforms, but 
yet he did not dare to take any effective measures to 
grant their demands, in the face of the opposition of 
the Council. And so, he acted half-heartedly and 
merely increased the confusion. Lord Russell, 
indeed, crushed the insurgents in the West, but, 



200 THE REFORMATION 

under the leadership of Robert Ket, a tanner, the 
East became more and more inflamed and a species 
of government was established at the " Oak of 
Reformation," near Norwich (1549). Eventually, the 
Council forced Somerset to act, and Warwick was 
sent to crush the rebellion, after Lord Northampton 
had been defeated. The new general performed his 
work well, and his victorious return to London was 
the signal for the fall of Somerset. 

Warwick succeeded to the authority of his rival, 
though without the title of Protector, but there was 
no improvement in the government. Boulogne, 
incapable of resisting any longer, was sold to the 
French, the currency was still further depreciated, 
and the violent Reformation went on. The execu- 
tion of Somerset and an attempt to compel the 
Princess Mary to give up the Mass, which was foiled 
by the intervention of Charles V., made Warwick 
thoroughly unpopular, and as he had identified him- 
self entirely with the Protestant cause, he realised 
that the death of Edward VI. and the accession of his 
sister would be the signal for his own execution. He 
therefore conceived the idea of transferring the crown 
to the descendants of Mary, daughter of Henry VH., 
whose representative was Lady Jane Grey, a Pro- 
testant, and the wife of Lord Guildford Dudley, a son 
of the Duke of Northumberland, to which title 
Warwick had now been exalted. In this attempt he 
had the support of Cranmer and the Reformers, who 
saw that their newly-acquired advantages would be 
lost if the Catholic Mary succeeded. Those advan- 
tages were considerable, for both Somerset and his 



PROGRESS OF THE REFORMATION 201 

rival had laboured energetically to make the Church 
thoroughly Protestant. At the very opening of the 
reign, the Earl of Southampton was deprived of the 
Chancellorship, ostensibly for having neglected his 
duties, really because he was the leader of the re- 
actionary party, and Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, 
was imprisoned for expressing his disapproval of 
innovations. The publication of a book of Homilies, 
framed on Protestant lines ; the repeal of the Six 
Articles and of all legislation against Lollardry and 
Lutheranism ; and the destruction of pictures and 
stained glass windows followed. Finally, Somerset 
and Cranmer issued the first Prayer Book of Edward 
VI., and passed the first Act of Uniformity (1548). 
With the accession of Northumberland to power, 
even more violent measures were adopted. Such 
bishops as adhered to the old religion were deprived, 
and Protestants of the stamp of Latimer, Hooper, 
and Ridley were appointed to the vacant sees. The 
confiscation of the property of religious bodies was 
carried still further, and the endowments of the 
Universities were partially appropriated. The 
influence of Calvin had now extended to England ; 
the Second Prayer Book and the Forty-two Articles 
were framed in accordance with the school of Geneva 
(1552). But to the great majority of the people these 
changes were abhorrent, and the policy of North- 
umberland was only supported by the extreme men 
and by the refugees from the Continent. Political 
separation from Rome was, indeed, generally popular, 
but as yet there was no real wish for doctrinal reform. 
And as Northumberland resolved to stake all upon 



202 THE REFORMATION 

a change in the succession, he secured a doubtful 
assent from the king, and as soon as Edward was 
dead, proclaimed Lady Jane Grey as queen (1553). 

But the nation was unanimous in support of Mary ; 
an attempt to capture her failed, and a few weeks 
after the death of the king, Northumberland was a 
prisoner in the hands of his enemies. He was 
executed, and his contemptible protestation of devo- 
tion to the new queen, and of .his secret adherence to 
Catholicism, prevents any pity being felt for him. 
He was, indeed, a mere adventurer, without even the 
solitary virtue of courage which does something to 
redeem the character of many otherwise bad men. 
His innocent accomplice, Lady Jane Grey, and her 
husband were for the present merely imprisoned in 
the Tower. The ease, with which the plot of North- 
umberland had been defeated was due to the general 
desire to end the violent changes in religion, and to 
return to the state of things which had prevailed 
under Henry VHI. But Mary had really much more 
extensive plans, and a complete restoration of the old 
order could alone satisfy her conscience. For the 
present, however, the influence of Renard, the 
Spanish ambassador, served to restrain her, and she 
contented herself with the more moderate scheme 
and with the remodelling of the bench of bishops by 
the imprisonment or expulsion of the more extreme 
prelates. Most of these were deprived, and Cranmer 
and Latimer were sent to the prisons from which 
Gardiner and Bonner were released. Mary was, 
indeed, more anxious to accomplish another object ; 
she had fallen in love with the portrait of Philip of 




Cardinal Pole. 

After the picture by Titian, now in the possession of Lord Arundel of 
War dour. By permission of the owner and Messrs. Cassell ^ Co. 



204 ^^^ REFORMATION 

Spain, and to marry him was the darh'ng wish of her 
heart. But the scheme was intensely unpopular in 
England, where it was feared that it would reduce 
the country to the position of a Spanish province and 
bind it irrevocably to union with the Catholic powers. 
When the queen pressed the scheme, a widespread 
conspiracy was formed to depose her in favour of 
Elizabeth. Sir Thomas Wyatt raised Kent and 
moved on London, and Mary's position was for a 
time one of extreme danger. But she threw herself 
upon the loyalty of the citizens ; Wyatt allowed him- 
self to be deceived into negotiations, and though he 
did eventually penetrate into the city, his followers 
deserted him and he was arrested at Temple Bar 
(1554). The only result of the rising was to cause 
the execution of Lady Jane Grey and Lord Guildford 
Dudley ; an attempt to involve Elizabeth in the same 
fate being prevented by the moderate party, who 
represented that the inevitable consequence would be 
a revolution. Soon afterwards the marriage with 
Philip was accomplished, and Mary now thought that 
she was strong enough to complete the religious 
reaction, which had been interrupted. 

Accordingly she induced Parliament to accept the 
papal absolution and acknowledge once more the 
supremacy of the Pope. Cardinal Pole, the last of 
the exiled Yorkist family, came back to England as 
Legate, and completed the work of reunion ; though 
in one respect a compromise had to be permitted, 
since it was found impossible to restore the confis- 
cated property of the religious houses. The statutes 
against heretics were now revived ; and, though 



DEATH OF CRANMER 205 

Philip opposed persecution, his departure, which 
speedily followed, saw these laws rigorously enforced. 
All over England Protestants were hurried to the 
stake, the most prominent victims being Latimer, 
Ridley, and Hooper. Cranmer's death followed 
shortly afterwards (1555). The story of his execu- 
tion — how he recanted and then recanted his recant- 
ation — is well known, and need not be repeated here. 
But, as it has been pointed out, his very weakness 
was a source of strength to the Protestant cause ; the 
sympathy of thousands went out to the poor old man 
in the hour of his trial, and the final victory of his 
conscience braced many a fainting heart. It is not 
without reason that his name is remembered, para- 
doxical as it may seem to exalt a time-serving 
courtier into a saint. Cranmer did not possess any 
one of the qualities which go to make up a hero. He 
had humbly followed every change in Henry VHI.'s 
views, he had denied and reaffirmed every doctrine 
according to the mood of the king, he had been active 
in his support of the divorce of Katherine of Aragon 
and of the execution of Anne Boleyn, he had shared 
in all the violence of Edward VI.'s reign, he had given 
his allegiance to Lady Jane and to Mary, and his 
final profession of the Reformed faith was, perhaps, 
made only when he found that nothing would save 
him. But the eventual triumph of this weak, 
vacillating mind did more than the unbending stern- 
ness of a Latimer to confirm the faith of the other 
Reformers ; they felt that the archbishop was a man 
like themselves, whereas the bolder spirits seemed to 
belong to another order of beings. And to Cranmer 



206 THE REFORMATION 

the members of the Established Church, at least, 
must always feel gratitude as the man chiefly 
responsible for one of the noblest specimens of 
English prose, that Prayer Book, the accents of which 
have brought peace and consolation to many a sick 
and suffering mind. 

After the archbishop's death, the bloody work 
went on, gaining increased vigour from the discovery 
and frustration of a conspiracy. Mary grew more 
and more earnest in her endeavours to stamp, out 
heresy, but the people sickened at the continued 
slaughter, her popularity waned and gave place to 
hatred, until the Pope himself and the Catholic 
princes besought her to stay her hand. England 
was now" dragged into a war between France and 
Spain by her alliance with Philip, and the brilliant 
victory of St. Quentin was shared by English 
soldiers (1557). But the enthusiasm which this 
success might have aroused was quenched by the loss 
of Calais, The last foothold of England on the 
Continent was surprised and captured by the Duke 
of Guise, and, though it had ceased to be of any very 
great value, its fall was felt to be a national disgrace. 
The disaster destroyed the last traces of loyalty to 
the queen, and Mary was probably only saved from 
deposition by her death. 

For this most unhappy and miserable of women 
one can feel nothing but a great pity. There is pre- 
served her copy of the Liturgy, and in it two prayers 
are marked by constant use. They are those for 
Unity and for the Safe Delivery of a Woman in 
Childbirth, And they show the two desires which 



CHARACTER OF MARY 20'J 

dominated her throughout Hfe — to see Christendom 
no longer divided and to be a mother. Narrow, 
bigoted, cruel was Mary, but most profoundly in 
earnest. And her lot was, indeed, most bitter. 
Neglected and deserted by her husband, whom she 
adored, she was left alone to face the failure of all her 
hopes. Her longed-for child — the advent of whose 
birth had actually been proclaimed — was never born. 
The religion, to which she was so passionately 
devoted, was threatened by the near approach of the 
accession of a heretic, and the holocausts, which she 
blindly ordered, failed to appease an angry God. 
Tortured by her conscience, racked by disease, 
abandoned by those to whom she trusted, desolate, 
without friends, without hope, she lived her sad, 
solitary life. Few stories, if any, in history are so 
infinitely pathetic as that of this unhappy queen, 
and some of that sympathy which is so readily ex- 
tended to Mary Stuart may well be spared for Mary 
Tudor. 

With the accession of Elizabeth there ceased to be 
any question of the permanent restoration of the 
" old religion," and, though the final constitution and 
doctrines of the Church had yet to be settled, the 
nature of the Reformation in England may be 
summed up at this point. The peculiar characteristic 
of the movement was the predominance of political 
considerations and the absence of great ideals and 
noble-hearted men. On the Continent, whatever 
may be thought of the characters of the Reformers, 
it cannot be seriously denied that they placed their 
religious convictions before everything, and that they 



208 THE REFORMATION 

were convinced of the truth of that which they 
preached. But in England the Reformation origin- 
ated in the lust of an immoral king, and was carried 
out by essentially worldly men. There can be no 
admiration for the private characters of Henry VIII., 
Cromwell, Cranmer, Somerset, or Northumberland ; 
one and all they acted from motives of political 
expediency, and their doctrines were conformed to the 
exigencies of the moment. Old Hugh Latimer, 
indeed, may appear to be an exception, but he was 
not a prime mover in the changes, and the brightness 
of his virtue is all the greater by reason of the 
surrounding darkness. It is, indeed, only among the 
subordinates that one can find much good. The 
heroes are insignificant men, great only in their 
deaths. And so there is little ennobling in the 
external history of the English Reformation ; for 
moral greatness it is necessary to seek among the 
records of the common herd. It is this which con- 
stitutes the first great point of contrast between the 
history of this period in England and on the Con- 
tinent. And again, abroad the movement began 
from below and spread gradually upwards ; but here 
the reverse was the case. The reforms of Edward 
VI.'s reign, the time of the first great doctrinal 
changes, were forced by the government upon an 
unwilling people, and in face of even armed opposi- 
tion. It was the Marian persecution which coii 
verted England to Protestantism. At that time the 
country saw the possibilities of Catholicism ; it saw 
the meaning of submission to Rome, and it learned a 
lesson which has not yet been forgotten. Up to the 




^ 

8 



2IO THE REFORMATION 

burning of Latimer and his fellows, the people, as a 
whole, were supporters of the old faith, thenceforth 
the majority was in favour of anything rather than 
that. 

Upon the social and economic conditions of 
England the Reformation, involving as it did the 
partial disendowment of an institution which owned 
nearly half the real property in the country, could 
not fail to have a profound effect. By the dissolu- 
tion of the monasteries, the possession of land passed 
into the hands of new men, whose aim it was to make 
as much profit as possible from their property. They, 
therefore, either raised rents very considerably or 
converted the farms into pasturage. The monks had 
been lenient with their tenants, and had been great 
employers of labour, for they desired rather to make 
each monastery self-supporting than to increase their 
already great wealth. And so, under the new con- 
ditions, numbers of men were thrown out of work, 
and from their ignorance of anything except agri- 
culture, they could for the present find no employ- 
ment. Moreover, in face of the competition of great 
landowners small farming ceased to pay ; prices had 
risen with the rise in rent and the depreciation of the 
coinage, and were maintained at a high level by the 
class of wholesale dealers which now arose. As a 
result there was widespread distress, the country was 
filled with numbers of sturdy beggars, and crimes of 
violence enormously increased. The ridicule cast 
upon things, which had been formerly the object of 
great veneration, exemplified by parodies of the Mass 
and desecration of the Sacraments, led to scepticism 



STATE OF THE CHURCH 211 

and a decline in morality, and, as is always the case 
with great movements, the doctrines of the Reformers 
were perverted into an excuse for vice. 

Under the rule of Wolsey the Church had attained 
to the zenith of her material prosperity, but, from 
various causes, she now sank into comparative 
insignificance. Her intellectual superiority vanished 
with the revival of learning, which led to the spread- 
ing of knowledge among the people. Her wealth 
was impaired, and with it much of her grandeur 
disappeared. Her political influence was greatly 
decreased by the employment of laymen in the 
principal offices of state, where they presumed even 
to settle points of doctrine. And the separation 
from Rome made her truly national at the expense 
of her independence. Henry VHI. had complained 
that the clergy were really the Pope's subjects, but 
now they could no longer look abroad for help ; they 
were reduced to obedience and deprived of their 
peculiar courts. In short, that fall of the Church, 
which had been delayed by the influence of the 
Crown, now took place, and the rise of Noncon- 
formity which presently began reduced her to a 
condition of even greater subserviency. 

In the same way the nobility declined also. This 
was partly the result of Henry VIII.'s character, 
which led him to prefer in any case men whose 
fortunes he had made and whose very importance 
depended upon himself and flattered his pride. But 
he was later on compelled to employ such ministers. 
The nobles as a class were opposed to his changes 
in the Church and hankered after the old order, and 



212 THE REFORMATION 

it was clearly necessary to entrust the carrying out 
of those changes to men who sympathised with 
them. Henry found them in the middle cla^s. 
Cromwell, a man of low birth, affords one example ; 
and Northumberland, whose father was Dudley, the 
notorious extortioner, is another. And thus from 
force of circumstances rather than from deep con- 
siderations of policy, the work, which Henry VH. 
began, was continued, and all chance of a resuscita- 
tion of the old type of noble passed away. 

It has been seen that under Henry VHI. Parliament 
continued to give unqualified support to the Crown, 
but in the reigns of Edward VI. and Mary it showed 
signs of a wish to reassert its independence. The 
statute, which gave to royal proclamations the force 
of law, was repealed, and though such proclamations 
were still issued, they were now at least illegal. 
During the regency of Somerset the multifarious 
treasons created in the preceding reign were abol- 
ished ; and when a bill establishing new treasons 
was introduced, the Commons successfully insisted 
that the evidence of two witnesses should be essential 
to a conviction. They further resisted the passage 
of several bills introduced by government, and the 
creation of pocket boroughs, which began at this 
time, is a proof of the necessity of influencing Parlia- 
ment and of obtaining its sanction to all measures. 
On the other hand, the reign of Henry VI 11. witnessed 
the establishment of councils like that of the Marches 
of Wales and that of the North, which deprived a 
large part of the country of the benefits of the 
common law and restricted the authority of Parlia- 



REVIEW OF THE PERIOD 21 3 

ment But it must be mentioned that though they 
might become, and indeed did become, at a later 
date formidable engines of tyranny, yet in their 
inception they did good work in facilitating the 
maintenance of order, without which the growth of 
liberty was impossible. 

There is indeed a bright side to the picture of this 
time. The consolidation of the kingdom, effected by 
the absorption of Wales and its division into counties 
was in itself a beneficial event. And, while agriculture 
was depressed and the older towns continued to 
decline, the prosperity of London and of the new 
centres of industry was still increasing. By the 
dissolution of the monasteries much wealth, which 
had hitherto been locked up, was put into circulation, 
and land began to change hands more rapidly, partly 
as a result of the Statute of Uses, by which the 
person for whose benefit an "use" was established, 
became the owner of the property. Though it sus- 
tained a throwback in the reign of Edward VL, 
commerce continued to grow, and even during that 
reign a new market was opened up by an expedition 
to Russia, which had been before this time practically 
an unknown land, but where the English now acquired 
a lucrative monopoly of trade. And, moreover, the 
intellectual liberty, which was one result of the 
Reformation, led to increased national energy, and 
hence to increased prosperity. In short, the depres- 
sion was merely temporary — the time of preparation 
for a period of unparalleled success. 




VIII 



THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 



(1558-1587) 



The reign of Elizabeth falls naturally into two 
periods — in the first, England is standing on the 
defensive, and the queen engaged in the task of 
securing her position ; in the second, that position 
has been secured, the time for a vigorous policy has 
arrived, and England assumes the offensive. At the 
time of her accession the position was one of very 
grave danger. Within, there was the religious diffi- 
culty : on the one hand, the Catholics had been so 
exalted in the last reign that they were not likely to 
submit tamely to the rule of their opponents ; on the 
other, the Protestants were burning to revenge them- 
selves upon their late persecutors. Without, England 
had to face hostility from France, Spain, and Scot- 
land. The first and the last of these countries were 
united by old-standing ties of friendship, and by the 
marriage which had been arranged between Mary and 
the Dauphin, while a state of war already existed 

between France and England. From Spain the 

214 



ACCESSION OF ELIZABETH 21 5 

danger was less pressing, but still very real. For the 
present, indeed, there was an alliance with Philip II., 
but it was to be feared that any clear return to 
Protestantism would lead to an open quarrel, while 
the existing connection was unpopular in England. 
Finally, Mary Stuart was regarded by many as the 
rightful queen — the marriage of Henry VIII. to Anne 
Boleyn being considered as invalid — and by nearly 
every one as the next in the order of succession ; so 
that she was a possible rival to Elizabeth, a probable 
centre round which the disaffected might rally ; and 
in any case certainly a dangerous neighbour. And, 
with such a number of enemies to face, the new 
queen had necessarily to act with caution lest they 
should combine to crush her. 

Elizabeth, therefore, was at first compelled, whether 
she wished it or no, to resort to compromise. The 
religious work of the last reign was undone by the 
repeal of the statutes against Protestants, the publica- 
tion of a Prayer Book, the reassertion of the royal 
supremacy over the Church, and the passing of 
an Act of Uniformity ; but no very decided steps 
were taken to repress the Catholics, and though all 
the bishops except one resigned, the majority of the 
clergy acquiesced. As a matter of fact, this policy 
pleased neither party, but each hoped that it would 
be eventually changed in accordance with their own 
views, the Catholics judging that the moderation of 
the queen proved her real sympathy with themselves, 
and the Protestants regarding the changes as merely 
preliminary measures which would be followed by 
more definite steps, so that both remained quiet for 



2l6 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

the present The less extreme men on either side 
were, perhaps, really satisfied. Meanwhile a peace 
had been concluded with France, in which there was 
a vague stipulation that Calais should be restored to 
England after a time (1558). And, though his offer 
of marriage was declined, Philip maintained friendly 
relations with the queen, being led to do so by his 
dread of an Anglo-French alliance. There was still a 
certain danger that Henry II. would give the English 
Catholics the support of French soldiers in an attempt 
to place Mary on the throne of England, but his 
accidental death removed this fear, the reign of his 
successor, Francis II., being troubled by. the ambition 
of the Guises and the increasing strength of Pro- 
testantism in France. 

For this escape from the danger which immediately 
threatened her, Elizabeth was largely indebted to the 
ability of her ministers. Of these the foremost was 
William Cecil, the future Lord Burleigh. He was 
gifted with pre-eminent ability, devoted before all 
things to the service of the queen, and a most skil- 
ful diplomatist. His advice was generally followed, 
but not always. He would in all probability have 
taken a decided line much earlier than was actually 
done, and would have assumed for England the 
championship of the Protestant cause almost at the 
very outset of the reign. But Elizabeth was by no 
means so enthusiastic as her minister, and was 
habitually inclined to steer a middle course whenever 
this was possible. Moreover, her personal favourites 
sometimes swayed her mind, though it is true that 
her good sense generally brought her back to her 




Pkoio] [Emery Walker. 

MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS (1542-I587). 

After a picture attributed to Frangois Clouet {Janet), in the National 

Portrait Gallery. 



2l8 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

trust in Cecil. The most influential of her courtiers, 
Robert Dudley, afterwards Earl of Leicester, son of 
Northumberland, who was consistently opposed to 
the great minister, was never able to procure his 
dismissal, though he succeeded, perhaps, in occasion- 
ally thwarting his plans. The tortuous policy of the 
first half of the reign was due partly to the ever- 
present danger of a Catholic league against England, 
partly to the character of the queen, and partly to 
the rivalry between the two parties in the state — the 
ministers and the favourites. 

As has been hinted already, it was the rivalry 
between Elizabeth and Mary Stuart which formed 
the pivot round which foreign policy revolved during 
the first part of the reign. The anti-English party 
had triumphed in Scotland ; Mary of Guise, the 
queen-mother, had secured the regency by means of 
a compromise with theEarl of Arran, and, under her 
influence, the country was filled with French troops. 
But, meanwhile, the Reformation had made some 
progress, and the efforts of the Regent to suppress 
it led to the formation of a league between the Pro- 
testant nobles, who assumed the title of the Lords .of 
the Congregation. Under the influence of John 
Knox they presently took up arms, ostensibly against 
the French, and, as the government received support 
from the Guises, they appealed to Elizabeth for 
help. But it was only granted after great hesita- 
tion, since the English queen had an inveterate 
hatred for rebellion, and though some troops were 
at last sent, and co-operated in the siege of Leith, 
a pacification was brought about by Cecil upon the 



MAR\\ QUEEN OF SCOTS 219 

death of the Regent. By this arrangement, known 
as the Treaty of Edinburgh, the government was to 
be entrusted to a committee of twelve, while the 
French were to leave the country, and a settlement of 
the religious question to be effected by the Scotch 
Parliament (1559). The immediate results of the 
peace were the establishment of Protestantism as 
the state religion, and a proposal that Elizabeth 
should marry Arran and unite the two crowns. But 
this scheme was rejected in London, and the death 
of Francis II. led all parties to unite under Lord 
Moray, an illegitimate son of James V., in recalHng 
Mary and in an attempt to free Scotland from all 
foreign influence. Despite the opposition of the 
English Court, the Scotch queen did return, and 
thus Elizabeth's chief enemy was on her borders 
with a temporarily united nation behind her. 

Mary's first act was to demand that she should be 
recognised as heir to the throne of England, and, 
when this was refused, she placed herself in open 
hostility by marrying her cousin Henry, Lord 
Darnley, the head of the English Catholics. She 
then entered into alliance with the other anti- 
Protestant states, expelled the Lords of the Con- 
gregation, and checked the progress of the Reforma- 
tion at home (1565). Bu her marriage was attended 
with disastrous results for herself Darnley was 
coarse and brutal, and Mary, having quarrelled with 
him, sought consolation in more congenial society. 
But her husband was also jealous. He secretly 
recalled the exiled nobles, and caused Rizzio, his 
wife's chief favourite, to be torn from her arms and 



220 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

murdered. Reconciliation then became impossible. 
Mary dissembled her anger while she organised her 
party with the help of Lord Bothwell, and her plot 
culminated in the assassination of Darnley and her 
own flight and marriage with the leader of the 
murderers (1567). This led the Lords of the Con- 
gregation to take up arms once more. The queen 
was defeated at Carberry Hill, imprisoned in Loch- 
leven Castle, and compelled to abdicate in favour of 
her infant son. Less than a year later she escaped, 
but her hastily-raised forces being dispersed at 
Langside, she crossed the border and threw herself 
upon the generosity of Elizabeth (1568). 

The presence of her rival so near home increased 
the difficulties of the English queen, great as they 
already were. She was indeed threatened on all 
sides. In the Netherlands there was the army of 
Alva, who had recently triumphed over the revolted 
Protestants and was ready and anxious to purge 
England of heresy. The slight assistance which she 
had rendered to the Huguenots had only served to 
irritate the French, without leading to the triumph of 
the Reformers, and she was no longer protected 
on this side by the existence of rivalry between 
France and Spain. At home, too, the conflict 
between the two parties had become more pro- 
nounced ; the Puritans, as the more extreme 
Reformers began to be called, pressed for more 
vigorous measures against their rivals ; while the 
Catholics, who no longer hoped for a restoration 
of the old order by Elizabeth, were intriguing with 
foreign states and were now given a leader in the 



MARY IN ENGLAND 221 

person of the fugitive queen. So critical, indeed, 
was the situation that a marriage with the archduke 
Charles of Austria was seriously contemplated, but 
despite th6 advantages of such a match, which would 
have ended the Spanish hostility and soothed the 
English Catholics, the queen was eventually unable 
to reconcile herself to the inevitable loss of her 
freedom of action. Equally unsuccessful was an 
attempt to settle the question of Mary's position. 
It was hoped that she might be induced to abdicate 
once more in favour of her son, since Elizabeth could 
not restore her to unrestricted liberty and was clearly 
unable to exercise any legitimate control over a 
neighbouring queen. With a view to hastening the 
accomplishment of this scheme, or of justifying the 
use of compulsion, it was arranged that the Lords 
of the Congregation should be called upon to answer 
for their rebellion, which would have given Moray 
the opportunity to produce the famous " Casket 
Letters," which, he alleged, proved Mary's guilt in 
connection with the murder of Darnley. But before 
anything could be done Elizabeth stopped the pro- 
ceedings, fearing to anger the English Catholics at 
a time when Philip was adopting a hostile attitude 
owing to the depredations committed by English 
privateers. Nothing was settled at all, Mary re- 
mained a prisoner, and Moray ruled Scotland in 
the name of James VI. 

There now begins that series of schemes and 
plots, which occupies the chief piace in the history 
of England until the execution of the queen of Scots, 
and which had for their object either the recognition 



222 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

of Mary as heir to the EngHsh throne or the 
deposition of Elizabeth with a view to her im- 
mediate succession. For a time even the moderate 
Protestants wished to solve this question at once, 
until the opposition of the queen led them to agree 
to an indefinite postponement. It was, however, 
the Catholics, who were the prime movers in all 
these plots, and they received more or less open 
support from Spain. In the same year as that of 
the abortive investigation into Mary's case, the Duke 
of Norfolk attempted to raise the northern counties, 
with the object of marrying the captive queen, 
securing her acknowledgment as heir, and destroying 
the influence of Cecil. But the plot was detected, the 
duke arrested, and the other leaders forced to take 
refuge in Scotland (1569). The refusal of Moray to 
surrender the fugitives was followed by a quarrel 
between him and Elizabeth, and the withdrawal of 
her support led to his assassination, and the triumph 
of the anti-English party. At the same time 
France threatened war, only the renewed activity 
of the Huguenots preventing an attack upon 
England ; while the publication of a papal bull, 
declaring that Elizabeth was deposed, seemed to 
justify the Catholics in plotting her overthrow. 
The final declaration of the Pope against the 
English queen was followed by the organisation of 
a much more formidable conspiracy. Ridolfi, an 
Italian banker, was the moving spirit in this new 
plot ; he proposed that Mary should marry Norfolk, 
that Elizabeth should be deposed, and that Al-va 
should assist in the re-establishment of Catholicism 



MASSACRE OF ST. BARTHOLOMEW 223 

by force of arms (1571). But Cecil's secret service 
agents were thoroughly efficient, the whole scheme 
was revealed to the English government, and 
Norfolk was arrested and executed. Though, 
however, the complicity of Mary was proved, 
nothing would induce Elizabeth to do anything 
against her. 

Even this evidence of the inveterate hostility of 
the Catholic powers did not suffice to draw the 
English queen from her attitude of compromise. 
For a while, indeed, she acted in concert with 
France in the Netherlands, but before long the 
alliance was broken. It had been proposed that 
Elizabeth should marry the Duke of Anjou, or the 
the Duke of Alencon, brothers of the French king ; 
and the latter, who was ambitious of founding a new 
kingdom in the Low Countries and even of becoming 
a Protestant leader, appeared for a time to be in 
high favour. But he had the misfortune to be ugly, 
and this fact, combined with his inordinate vanity, 
finally determined Elizabeth against him, and the 
rejection of his suit, coupled with her duplicity, 
ended the French connection. Shortly afterwards 
the mass&.cre of St Bartholomew (1572) at once 
alarmed England and led to a renewal of the 
religious war in France, which rendered that country 
powerless. Elizabeth, professing great indignation, 
for a while gave energetic support to the Huguenots, 
but as their cause revived she grew lukewarm and 
resumed her former half-hearted policy. Indeed, 
during this period she was constantly changing 
sides, vacillating between an attempted resumption 



224 ^^^ ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

of friendly relations with Spain and an inclination 
to finally throw in her lot with the Protestants. She 
was influenced by a fear that France might absorb 
the Netherlands, and consequently tried to keep 
both the revolted Dutch and the Huguenots in 
dependence on herself For this reason, too, negotia- 
tions for the Alencon match were reopened, when 
he finally came forward as the leader of the 
Protestants in the Low Countries, but the op- 
position to- it in England was too strong for 
anything to be done. 

But events now occurred which eventually com- 
pelled her to take decisive measures. The work 
of combating Protestantism was taken over by the 
Society of Jesus, and a renewed vigour appeared in 
the Catholic councils. In Ireland, in Scotland, and 
in England there were attempts to overthrow the 
heretic queen. It was in the first of these countries 
only that their efforts were successful. A rebellion, 
headed by Desmond, failed, indeed despite the 
assistance of Spanish troops, but the growth of 
Protestantism was for ever checked (1580). The 
young Irish nobility were persuaded to seek their 
education in the Jesuit schools of the Continent, and 
the foundation of Trinity College at Dublin came 
too late to stop the exodus. When they returned to 
Ireland the Irish gentlemen were confirmed in their 
belief in Catholicism, and threw all their influence 
into the work of maintaining it in their ow^n country, 
with the result that it has always been the religion of 
the majority in that island. In Scotland the Jesuits, 
after some temporary success, failed completely. 



JESUIT SCHEMES 225 

They sent thither Esme Stuart, who obtained 
recognition as Earl of Lennox and estabHshed 
himself in the favour of the king, but the people 
were now thoroughly Protestant, and he soon 
quarrelled with the General Assembly. By the 
Raid of Ruthven his opponents secured the person 
of James, and put an end to the influence of 
Lennox (1582). 

Meanwhile, two Jesuits, Campion and Parsons, 
had arrived in England, and in conjunction with 
the Spanish ambassador prepared a fresh plot. 
There was to be a general Catholic rising in favour 
of Mary, which was to be supported by both France 
and Spain. But while Philip hesitated, one of the 
conspirators, named Throgmorton, was arrested, and 
all the details of the scheme were known. The chief 
result of the plot was the rupture of diplomatic 
relations with Spain by the dismissal of the 
ambassador. Shortly afterwards the assassination 
of William the Silent by a fanatical priest, alarmed 
all England and increased the already existing 
apprehension as to the safety of the queen's life. 
The majority of Englishmen, however much they 
might have desired even the deposition of Elizabeth, 
shrank from the idea of murdering her, and the chief 
men of both parties united in signing the " Bond 
of Association," declaring that they would protect 
her life by every means in their power and oppose 
to the death the succession of any one in whose 
favour an assassination was perpetrated (1584). 
And while the murder of the Prince of Orange 
served in England to increase the popularity and 

16 



226 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

security of the queen, it defeated its own ends in 
the Netherlands. After failing in an attempt to 
induce Henry III. of France to declare war against 
Spain, Elizabeth consented to help the revolted 
provinces, receiving the title of Protector of the 
States, sending across an arnay under the command 
of Leicester, and having certain places handed over 
to her as guarantees of the good faith of her allies. 
But she still continued her efforts to avoid open 
war, and, while taking care that her army in the 
Netherlands should be too weak to accomplish any- 
thing decisive, betrayed the confidence which had 
been reposed in her by intriguing with Philip. The 
English troops, after making a brave, but ineffectual, 
attempt to raise the siege of Zutphen (1586), were 
left without supplies or reinforcements, while Parma, 
the greatest military genius of the age, gained 
success after success. 

Indeed, it seemed as though Elizabeth would 
sacrifice the Dutch, when the discovery of a fresh 
plot finally convinced her of the futility of her 
hopes of a compromise with Catholicism as re- 
presented by Spain, and led her to take decisive 
measures at last. The new conspiracy, headed by 
Anthony Babington, at the instigation of Ballard, 
a Jesuit, was deliberately aimed at the queen's , 
life (1586). As soon as the proofs of the plot were 
complete and in the hands of Walsingham, the 
Secretary of State, the ringleaders were arrested, 
and the papers which were found on them, com- 
bined with previous information, proved that the 
scheme had received the sanction of Mary. Her 



EXECUTION OF MARY 22^ 

letters were also seized, and additional proof thus 
secured. She was arraigned before a commission 
of peers at Fotheringay, unanimously found guilty 
upon all counts, and condemned to death. Still 
nearly four months elapsed before Elizabeth could 
bring herself to take the irrevocable step of sign- 
ing the necessary warrant. At last she did so ; 
Burleigh and Walsingham hurriedly despatched it to 
Fotheringay, and two days after the signature had 
been obtained Mary was beheaded in Fotheringay 
Castle. With almost her last breath she bequeathed 
her rights to the English throne and the task of 
avenging her death to Philip of Spain (1587). 

It is no wonder that the picture of a beautiful 
queen, led forth to execution on a cold, grey winter's 
morning, should excite much pity, or that Elizabeth 
should be assailed with invective as the murderer 
of her guest. And for this pity there is some real 
ground. Mary was to a great extent the victim 
of circumstances. Educated in a foreign country, 
in a land, moreover, of polished manners and 
arbitrary government, she was called upon, at a 
time of grave difficulty, to rule a rough and in- 
dependent people of whose character and ideas she 
was hopelessly ignorant. From the very day of her 
arrival in Scotland she was treated with a lack of 
respect and consideration which almost forced her 
to retaliate. Those objects which she had been 
taught to regard with veneration were ridiculed in 
her very presence, and she was obliged to submit 
to being called an idolatress and to being lectured 
on her incapacity and superstition by the con- 



228 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

scientious, but uncourtly, John Knox. For political 
reasons she married a man utterly unsuited to her, 
and his violence and harshness led her to indis- 
cretions and crimes. Even if she were wholly 
cognisant of the plot to murder Darnley, much 
may be urged in excuse for her conduct — the previous 
excesses of her husband, the insupportable bitter- 
ness of her position, made a catastrophe inevitable. 
But while there is much to be said in defence of 
Mary's conduct, Elizabeth stands fully justified. 
From the time that she crossed the border until 
the day of her death the queen of Scots was a 
constant source of danger not only to the peace and 
security of her rival's throne, but to the very in- 
dependence of England, since the success of any 
of the plots in her favour would have led to the 
ultimate subjection of the country to Spain. And 
so, if it is ever right to put any one to death for 
political reasons, Elizabeth's conduct was justifiable 
on these grounds alone. But when Mary, after 
signing the " Bond of Association," gave her 
approval to a scheme for the assassination of 
the queen of England she thereby forfeited every 
claim to consideration. It became, in fact, a ques- 
tion whether she or Elizabeth should die, and by 
the first law of human nature, that of self- 
preservation, her execution was both necessary 
and right, however regrettable it might be. 

And with the execution of Mary the first part 
of Elizabeth's reign ends. England, thenceforth, 
was in open rivalry with Spain, and appears as the 
champion of Protestantism and freedom against 




Photo] 



SIR FRANCIS DRAKE (? 154O-1596). 

Fro-rn an etching by Vertue. 



\_E}ne?-y Walker. 



230 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

Catholicism and despotism. All possibility of a 
reconciliation with Spain and of a return to the 
old order disappeared when the axe fell at 
Fotheringay, and the deed done on that day in 
February ushered in the most glorious period, 
perhaps, in the whole of English history, when an 
attack by an apparently irresistible power was 
defeated, when the supremacy of England on the 
sea was established, and when the might of England 
was feared as it had never been before. And to 
this great epoch, the period immediately before it 
was an introduction. It was a time of preparation ; 
of apparent weakness, but really of growing 
strength ; a time of consolidation and settlement ; 
a time of half-measures and of cautious policy ; a 
time of diplomacy and avoidance of war. 

It is a little curious that the queen, witn whose 
name the splendour of the succeeding period is so 
indissolubly connected, should have been opposed 
to the course of action which led to that splendour 
and should have prevented its earlier adoption. And 
yet so it was. Elizabeth was by nature peaceful. 
She was fond of moderate counsels, and constitu- 
tionally averse to all extremes. Had Cecil been 
given a free hand, the struggle with Spain would 
have come much sooner ; but the queen would not 
act decisively, until she had no choice but to do so. 
And it is to this side of her character that the 
apparent purposelessness of her foreign policy until 
the death of Mary is due. She attempted to play off 
France against Spain, the Huguenots against the 
Catholics, the Dutch against the Spaniards, and Mary 



SETTLEMENT OF THE CHURCH 23 1 

against James VI. By giving a little help here and a 
little there, by preventing the complete triumph of 
any party, she hoped to avoid real war. And this is 
the key to her somewhat obscure policy. But 
moreover, as has been seen, she disliked rebellion ; 
partly from a fear that the example might prove 
disastrous to her own peace, partly from her high 
idea of the sacredness of the royal office. And the 
influence of her favourite, Leicester, must not be 
ignored ; she occasionally followed his advice and, as 
has been said, that advice was always contrary to 
Cecil's. It was only when the danger as well as the 
impossibility of temporising any longer was brought 
home to her, by the discovery of Babington's plot, 
that she at last consented to adopt the policy which 
her ministers had so long advocated in vain. Mary 
owed her long immunity from punishment to 
Elizabeth's fear of forcing an open rupture with 
Spain, and her execution was a sign that such a 
rupture had been decided upon. 

In the settlement of the Church, the great event of 
the first half of the reign, Elizabeth's love of com- 
promise is equally obvious. Her own religious 
convictions were not strong ; in so far as she had 
any views on doctrine, they were Catholic rather than 
Protestant. But she was compelled by political 
necessity to break with Rome. The daughter of 
Anne Boleyn was illegitimate in the eyes of all true 
Catholics ; her title to the throne was denied by 
many, and the Papacy consistently refused to 
recognise her. As a result, the Act of Supremacy 
was necessary to her safety ; she was unable to 



232 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

admit the jurisdiction of a hostile power in England. 
But in the Prayer Book she displayed her wish to 
satisfy both parties and to bring them both into the 
Church. And so, on vital points, its language is 
studiously ambiguous ; it admits, as it was intended 
to admit, of two diametrically opposite interpretations, 
both of which can be justified by an appeal to the 
theological writings of that time. The acceptance of 
the Prayer Book by the vast majority of the clergy 
is the strongest proof that it was regarded as a 
compromise, and the resignation of the bishops may 
be attributed to political, rather than to religious 
motives. It is very improbable that the bishops and 
the clergy differed in their views. It is conceivable 
that their position, which involved, in those days, 
more or less close intercourse with the sovereign, 
was by no means pleasant when that sovereign was 
opposed to them in her political views ; and this is 
certainly a more reasonable explanation than to 
suppose that the episcopal bench enjoyed an almost 
complete monopoly of spirituality. History goes to 
show that scruples of conscience have been more 
readily felt in the lower, than in the higher, ranks 
in the Church, By the mass of the people these 
measures were regarded as merely preparatory, and 
the Commons were anxious to make a much more 
decided advance in the direction of Calvinism. 

It was the zeal with which the Catholics supported 
the claims of Mary, the publication of the papal bull 
of deposition, and the arrival of the Jesuit mission- 
aries in England, which compelled Elizabeth, not' 
indeed to modify the doctrines of the Church, but 




Photo] [Emery Walker, 

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE (1564-1616). 

From the title-page of the First Folio of 1623. 



234 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

to persecute those who refused to take the oath 
prescribed by the Second Act of Supremacy. At 
the beginning of the reign great caution had been 
exercised in the administration of this oath ; the 
bishops had definite instructions not to press for its 
acceptance in case of a first refusal, so that the only 
penalty which such refusal entailed was that of 
prceinunire ; and Lord Montague urged in Parlia- 
ment that the Act was both unnecessary, wrong and 
dangerous. But the attitude of the Catholics in 
refusing open conformity, after the decision of the 
Council of Trent against that practice, and still more 
the Duke of Norfolk's plot, led to increased vigilance 
and rigour. The Thirty-nine Articles were at last 
made binding on the clergy ; the open statement of the 
Catholic view of the queen's title was declared to be 
high treason ; and the introduction or use of things 
blessed by the Pope was forbidden. The discovery 
of Ridolfi's plot, followed by the activity of the 
Jesuits, led to further severe measures. It was 
thought, not without considerable reason, that 
Catholic and traitor were synonymous terms, since 
the foreign missionaries taught that the queen was 
a heretic and usurper and might lawfully be put to 
death, and granted absolution only to such as 
accepted this doctrine. Further statutes were 
enacted to supplement the already existing laws, and 
the persecution became far more vigorous, from this 
time to the end of the reign. The Jesuits and other 
alien priests were the object of special severity ; 
their presence in the country was declared to be an 
act of high treason, and any one who either gave them 



PERSECUTION OF THE CATHOLICS 235 

food, or failed to report their presence to the 
authorities, was also punished. The great danger 
which existed from Catholic plots, and the wide- 
spread treason disclosed by the discovery of Throg- 
morton's conspiracy, justifies, to a certain extent, 
the Elizabethan persecution. Moreover, by the 
provisions of the papal bull, it was impossible to be 
both loyal to the queen and obedient to the Pope, 
and it was not unreasonable to fear that strict 
Catholics might prefer to observe their religious, 
rather than their national, obligations. And further 
excuse, though not justification, is found in the 
natural desire to avenge the injuries sustained by 
Prote.stants on the Continent and by English crews 
at the hands of the Holy Inquisition. But there can 
be no palliation for the continued ill-treatment of the 
Catholics in the latter part of the reign, when they 
had conclusively proved their loyalty by their 
services against the Armada. 

Into the highly controversial question as to the 
exact extent of doctrinal change effected by the 
Elizabethan settlement, it is not necessary to enter at 
length. It may be suggested, however, that the 
question is incapable of solution — that neither view 
can be conclusively proved. As already pointed out, 
the contemporary theologians are themselves divided, 
the expressions in the Prayer Book are ambiguous, 
and the whole settlement was essentially of the 
nature of a compromise. If some of the Thirty-nine 
Articles appear to be conceived in the spirit of 
Geneva, others have exactly the contrary character ; 
while all may be professed by men holding most 



236 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

divergent views, owing to a certain obscurity in their 
wording. As a matter of fact, nearly every 
theologian has a slightly varying idea as to the 
precise doctrines of the Established Church, for the 
reason that these doctrines have never been perfectly 
clearly defined. Some changes, rather of ceremonial 
than of doctrine, were indeed made. The practice of 
confession was retained but ceased to be compulsory ; 
the doctrine of transubstantiation was abandoned in 
favour of an ambiguously worded assertion of the 
Real Presence, the nature of this Presence not being 
clearly defined ; the observance of certain rites 
ceased to be obligatory, and various minor changes 
were affected. In short, the Church became 
Protestant in a political sense, while being in doctrine 
" a half-way house between Rome and Geneva," with 
such vagueness in the statement of her beliefs that a 
Catholic could almost join her communion, if he 
sacrificed papal supremacy, and a Calvinist, if he did 
not object to Episcopacy. 

Both to the adoption of a spirited foreign policy 
and to the establishment of a National Church, the 
Elizabethan sailors contributed in no small degree. 
With the exception of a brief interval in the reign of 
Edward VI., commerce had been steadily growing 
since the time of Edward IV., and a variety of causes 
led to a remarkably rapid expansion under Elizabeth. 
The prosperity of Flanders was temporarily ruined 
by the war of independence ; the traders, from 
considerations of safety, began to remove their 
business houses from that country to London, and 
that city became a really commercial centre. An 




EDMUND SPENSER (? 1552-1599). 

From an engraving by W. B. Scott, 1839. 



238 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

expedition, sent to discover the North-East Passage 
and bearing letters vaguely addressed to the " rulers " 
of the country at which they might arrive, entered 
the White Sea and opened up relations between 
England and Russia. Ivan the Terrible regarded 
the English with great favour ; they were allowed to 
establish factories at Archangel and Moscow, and an 
Englishman was selected as envoy to the Khans of 
Central Asia. A profitable overland trade was 
started between that district and Moscow by way of 
Astrakan, and the accounts brought back to England 
of the strange lands visited in this way, contributed 
to encourage the already existing spirit of adventure. 
At the same time, the Hanseatic monopoly was 
broken down, the German house at the Steelyard 
was closed, and the English trade in the Baltic and 
North Sea passed into native hands. But it was to 
the Western Ocean that the minds of English sailors 
chiefly turned. Ever since Sebastian Cabot had 
returned to Bristol with the news of his discoveries, 
ships had been frequently despatched to the coast of 
North America. An extensive cod-fishery was 
started off Newfoundland and Labrador, while the 
hope of discovering the North- West Passage led to 
much exploration in the north-westerly direction. 

But these regions were cold and inhospitable, and 
the imagination of the English adventurers was 
excited by the glowing descriptions of the Spanish 
lands, where the climate was warm, the country 
fertile, and where untold wealth might be acquired. 
A desire arose to share in the advantages of these 
happy lands, but as long as England was Catholic, 



THE ELIZABETHAN SAILORS 239 

the bull of Pope Alexander, which had divided the 
New World between the Spaniards and the Portu- 
guese, stood in the way of an attempt to encroach 
upon the preserves of these two nations. And so, 
commercial jealousy contributed to convert the 
English to Protestantism, that their religion might be 
an excuse for an attack on Spanish-America and not 
a hindrance. With the accession of Elizabeth, 
attacks began to be made by English sailors upon 
the treasure ships from the West Indies, Mexico, and 
Peru. At first these were delivered in conjunction 
with the Huguenots, with Rochelle and Plymouth as 
the bases of operations. But presently the operations 
were extended ; the hardy Devonshire seamen 
crossed the Atlantic, and the name of Sir Francis 
Drake was a source of terror to the Spanish settle- 
ments. It had not been thought worth while to 
defend them with forts, and they and their riches 
thus fell an easy prey to the English adventurers. 
Philip, in vain, remonstrated with Elizabeth ; she 
disowned the raiders but neglected to take any 
effective measures to stop them. Equally useless 
were the severe punishments inflicted upon any crews 
which were captured ; the misfortunes of their 
comrades merely stirred the survivors to avenge 
them ; while the wealth obtained, combined with the 
adventures experienced, led fresh men to engage in 
these expeditions. The queen herself shared in the 
spoil ; and, to her eternal shame, participated in a 
new source of gain, introduced by Sir John Hawkins. 
This was the slave trade, which had begun before, 
but in which he was the first Englishman to engage: 



240 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

The disgrace of this traffic in men cannot be excused 
upon any grounds, and it is not even reduced to any 
great extent by the opinion of the age ; for at an 
earUer date Isabella the Catholic had expressly 
forbidden the introduction of slave labour into 
Hispaniola and had thus set an example, which was 
unfortunately not followed either in Spain or else- 
where. 

But these predatory exploits roused Philip to 
action. The towns on the islands and on the coasts 
of Mexico and Guatemala were fortified, and the seas 
patrolled by a Spanish fleet. As he was engaged in 
the usual, work of plunder, Hawkins was attacked 
and barely escaped with the loss of his spoil and 
most of his ships. It became much more dangerous 
to attack the West Indies. Drake accordingly 
resolved to seek a new field of action and to penetrate 
into the Pacific, of which Englishmen only knew by 
hearsay. Accordingly, he sailed across the Atlantic, 
passed through the strait of Magellan, and passed up 
the coasts of Chili and Peru. He was everywhere 
thought to be a friend until too late ; the defenceless 
towns were plundered, and his ships were laden with 
booty when he at last turned homewards. He came 
back round the Cape of Good Hope ; the first 
Englishman to sail round the world (1577). In 
Spain the news of his voyage was received with 
mingled anger and surprise. It had been thought 
that the west coast of South America at least was 
safe from the English, and the revelation that this 
was by no means the case determined Philip to 
attempt the conquest of England. But, though the 



EFFECTS OF THE REFORMATION 24 1 

resolve was taken, he hesitated to put it into action 
until the execution of Mary gave him at once a 
better excuse and a better chance of success. Still it 
was the exploits of the English sailors on the Spanish 
main which really led to the fitting out of the 
Invincible Armada. 

While the final rupture with Rome was due 
largely, if not entirely, to commercial causes. 
Protestantism in its turn reacted upon commerce, 
since it caused a great outburst of national energy in 
all directions. Whatever views may be held as to 
the truth or reverse of Catholicism, an impartial mind 
must acknowledge that that religion is essentially 
opposed to freedom of intellectual speculation. The 
whole history, past and present, of those countries 
where it has, or does, possess anything like a 
complete ascendancy, goes to illustrate this point. 
And, indeed, the fundamental basis of its policy is a 
negation of the right of private judgment in the very 
matters upon which that judgment is most likely to 
be first exercised.' -Consequently, as long as Catholi- 
cism was supreme in England, men's minds were 
confined by the necessity of accepting without 
question certain dogmas ; intellectual growth was 
stunted, mental activity limited. But the essence of 
Protestantism is the admission of the inalienable 
right of every man to hold and to expound whatever 
doctrine he pleases, and though Protestant churches 
have persecuted, that is, have attempted to interfere 
with this right, such conduct is wholly contrary to 
the spirit of the Reformation — itself a protest against 
the compulsory acceptance of certain beliefs. Now, 

17 



242 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

when the new ideas spread to England^ they led to 
intellectual activity ; in theology first, and subse- 
quently in all branches of learning, since the previous 
restrictions upon speculation were broken down. It 
is true that, before the Reformation began, the 
"Utopia "had been published and that it is full of 
startling novelties, as compared with the generat 
opinions of that time ; but, More was the one 
exception to the general rule in England, as his 
friend Erasmus was on the Continent. Real activity 
began at the later date and its fruit is seen in the 
Elizabethan literature. 

The reign of the great queen produced more works 
of immortal value than any other one period of 
English history, and the names of the authors of this 
time are household words all the world over ; their 
fame is not confined to the limits of the Anglo-Saxon 
race. In themselves, the plays of Shakespeare would 
have been sufficient to give everlasting fame to the 
literature of a country. Though Buckhurst, Greene, 
and Marlowe anticipated him in the production of 
plays in which the characters were no longer merely 
artificial, Shakespeare stands far above either them or 
any other dramatist of Western Europe hy reason of 
the grandeur of his conception, the depth of his 
insight into human nature and the force and sub- 
limity of his language. For his peer as a writer of 
tragedy or comedy it is necessary to look back to the 
brightest age of Athens ; and since he was equally 
great in both branches of his art, he must be placed 
above even Sophocles or Aristophanes. The variety 
and extent of his observations, the richness of his 




BEN JONSON (? 1 573-1637). 

From the painting by Gerard Honthorst. 



244 THE ELIZABETHAN SETTLEMENT 

vocabulary, and the multiplicity of the themes with 
which he dealt, are alike wonderful. But he was not 
alone in his greatness. Few may now be able to say 
that they have read the whole of the " Faerie Queene," 
but Edmund Spenser's poem remains the greatest of 
allegories in verse, a worthy counterpart in English 
literature to Bunyan's *' Pilgrim's Progress." In poetry, 
too, the same age produced Ben Jonson, whose repu- 
tation would have been much greater had he not been 
overshadowed by his great contemporary and rival in 
the dramatic art, and even the " Arcadia " of Sir 
Philip Sidney, dull as it is, is not wholly destitute of 
merit. And the genius of the time was not confined 
to one or two branches of literature. Hooker pro- 
duced his deeply thought-out " Ecclesiastical Polity," 
a contribution of lasting value to the study of 
political theory. Camden shed light upon the anti- 
quities of his country. Gilbert wrote upon natural 
philosophy, and Hakluyt told of the many lands to 
which his countrymen had voyaged. To the era of 
Elizabeth belong also the names of Bacon, whose 
versatile mind led him to write upon nearly every 
subject possible and whose ability caused him to 
illuminate them all. Burton, the compiler of the 
strange " Anatomy of Melancholy ; " and Raleigh, 
who was author, politician, courtier, and explorer at one 
and the same time. The energy of the period shows 
itself in this brilliant literature ; it led to a new force 
of expression, vigour of style, and great originality of 
thought, and made the Elizabethan era the most 
splendid in English literary history. 

But there is a deeper significance to be attached to 



ELIZABETHAN LITERATURE 245 

the fact that great authors flourished at this time. 
A nation struggHng for liberty produces few works 
of genius, and a nation groaning under a hopeless 
despotism produces fewer still. The great literary 
epochs in the history of a people are the times when 
liberty has just been lost or when it is about to 
be regained. When Octavian had triumphed over 
the freedom of Rome, there followed the Augustan 
Age, all the ability which could no longer be devoted 
to the service of the state, turned into the paths of 
literature. When the ceaseless wars and terrible 
misgovernment of Louis XV. had made the tyranny 
no longer supportable in France, the first strivings 
after liberty appeared in the writings of the Encyclo- 
paedists. And so the Elizabethan literature is the 
outward and visible sign of the quiet growth of 
political independence, as well as the outcome of the 
deliverance of the national mind from the shackles 
of an intolerant dogmatism. It is evidence that 
England was beginning to awake ; that the nation 
was preparing to resume the rights which it had for a 
while surrendered to the sovereign, and that a great 
struggle was impending. It was, in short, the first 
indication of the beginning of that movement which 
culminated in the Great Rebellion. 



IX 



THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 



(1 587-1603) 



The execution of Mary Stuart was, in reality, a 
declaration of war against the Catholic powers of 
the Continent, but the civil disturbances in France 
prevented the Guises from going to the help of 
Philip and left England and Spain face to face. 
Although Elizabeth displayed great anger, whether 
real or assumed, at the precipitancy of her ministers, 
she deceived no one as to the true significance of 
the scene enacted at Fotheringay. The Catholics of 
Europe abandoned any faint hopes which they may 
have still entertained of winning the queen back to 
the true fold, and the Protestants were at one with 
their opponents in regarding the cause of England 
as identical with their own. But at the same time, 
like all the so-called " wars of religion," the present 
struggle was not fought simply and solely on a 
question of abstract theology. Philip was, as he 
professed to be, the champion of Catholicism, but 

he was no idealist and he would never have gone to 

246 




Photo] \^Einery Walker, 

PHILIP II., KING OF SPAIN (1527-I598). 

From the painting by Alofiso Sanchez Coello in the National 
Portrait Gallery. 



248 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

war purely in order to re-establish the papal supre- 
macy or the Latin Mass in England. The real 
point at issue was not whether the English Church 
and people should be compelled to acknowledge 
once more the authority of the Pope, but whether 
England should be allowed to have a share in the 
riches of the New World, whether she should be 
allowed to become a great power, and more, whether 
she should be allowed to retain her independence. 
The Armada threatened the religion of England ; 
it did much more, it threatened her whole future 
prosperity and menaced her very existence. It was 
this which the English Catholics realised ; it was 
this which caused them to rally round a queen who 
persecuted them, to die for a religion which they 
hated, to place their country before all else, and to 
display a patriotism which has rarely been equalled 
and never excelled in the history of the world. 

Philip had begun to prepare for the invasion of 
England even before Mary's death. Ever since 
Drake had ravaged the coast of Peru and Elizabeth 
had refused to punish him, the Spanish king had been 
convinced that the only security for his American 
possessions lay in the subjection of the country 
whence the daring robbers came. And, moreover, the 
conquest of the revolting Dutch appeared to be 
hopeless as long as they received substantial help 
from the English government and from English 
merchants, whenever they were reduced to extre- 
mities. As soon, therefore, as the union of Spain 
and Portugal had been effected, all the harbours of 
the Peninsula, of Naples, and of Sicily were filled 



THE ARMADA 249 

with the bustle of preparation. The resources of 
the three kingdoms were strained to the uttermost ; 
ships and stores were collected and everything 
possible was done to ensure the success of the great 
attempt. Drake, however, was not idle ; he forced 
his way into Cadiz, and did so much destruction in 
that port that the sailing of the expedition was 
delayed for nearly a year (1587). But at last all was 
ready, a fleet of between one hundred and thirty and 
one hundred and fifty sail was assembled in the 
Tagus, and Philip might well feel confident of success. 
Not only were the ships the pick of the Spanish navy 
and far superior in tonnage to any which could be 
brought against them, but the crews were fired with 
religious enthusiasm by the blessing of the Vicar of 
Christ; they numbered amongst them the. veterans 
who had shared in the glorious day of Lepanto, and 
they were members of a service which had never yet 
tasted of defeat in any engagement. There seemed 
to be but one disquieting fact, the Marquis of Santa 
Cruz, who had been given the command, had died 
almost on the eve of departure, and it was hard to 
replace such an experienced admiral. With strange 
perversity Philip fixed his choice on the Duke of 
Medina Sidonia, who only accepted the post under 
great pressure, and who knew more of horticulture 
than navigation, and preferred oranges to ships. 

But, despite this foolish appointment, the English 
appeared to be little capable of withstanding the 
attack of Philip's great armament. The royal navy 
consisted of but thirty ships and they were of doubt- 
ful value owing to the slight care which had been 



250 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

bestowed upon them. For its main strength, the 
defending fleet relied upon Drake's privateers and the 
vessels lent willingly by merchants and fishermen, 
and these were mostly much inferior in size to the 
ships of the Armada. Moreover, the queen dealt 
out supplies with a very sparing hand, the pay of the 
crews was in many cases in arrears, the fleet was 
short of ammunition and short of food. But the 
English had several important advantages. The low 
freeboard of their vessels made them difficult targets 
and the Spanish fire very often passed over them. 
In numbers they possessed a slight superiority and 
the ships were much faster and much more easily 
manoeuvred. Their armament was proportionately 
heavier, their guns had much greater penetrating 
power, and while the Armada could practically sail 
only before the wind, the English ships were able to 
tack and consequently to sail round their enemies 
and concentrate their fire upon their more vulnerable 
points. Operating in home waters the English were 
near their bases ; they were commanded by skilful 
admirals in whom they had every confidence ; the 
crews were composed of men who were devoted to 
their queen, and who combined with all the chivalrous 
loyalty of the knight-errant of fiction, a rational love 
of freedom, religious enthusiasm, and a strengthening 
patriotism. In the case, at least of the privateers, 
the sailors had been hardened by long voyages to the 
West Indies and to the American continent, while all 
were used to the choppy seas of the Channel which 
prostrated hundreds of their enemies with sea-sick- 
ness, since they were accustomed only to the com- 



THE ARMADA IN THE CHANNEL 25 1 

paratively calm Mediterranean or the steady swell of 
the Atlantic. Finally, the Spaniards were handicapped 
by their own faults. The plan of operations was 
badly conceived, depending as it did to a great extent 
upon an exact fulfilment of dates. The Armada was 
intended to cover the passage of Parma and his army 
to the east coast ; the duke had suspended active opera- 
tions against the Dutch and collected a number of 
transports, but when he was ready the fleet had not 
come and he was unable to cross without a convoy. 
Meanwhile, a combined English and Dutch squadron 
watched the shores of Flanders, and Parma was 
harassed by the rebel army which he dared not 
attack lest when the Armada came he should not be 
ready to invade England at once. And an unwise 
attempt was made to utilise the attacking fleet to 
transport reinforcements to the duke ; nearly twenty 
thousand soldiers were embarked, and as a result the 
ships were very much undermanned. 

It was in May, 1588, that amid the chanting of 
psalms and the singing of anticipatory Te Deums, 
the great armament weighed anchor from Lisbon, 
but misfortune attended it from the outset. A storm 
obliged it to scatter, some loss was sustained and it 
was not until the end of July that it was first sighted 
in the Channel off the Lizard. Meanwhile the 
English fleet had been collected in Plymouth Sound. 
The supreme command with the title of High 
Admiral was committed to Lord Howard of Effing- 
ham, a cousin of that Duke of Norfolk who had been 
executed for high treason. His abilities were con- 
siderable and his caution was useful in restraining the 



252 The struggle with spa in 

impetuosity of his subordinates, but possibly the 
fact that he was a Catholic contributed more than 
anything else to his appointment, since such an act 
of confidence could hardly fail to appeal to his co- 
religionists and to tend to confirm any waverers in 
their allegiance. Under him were more famous men 
— Drake, who commanded the privateers ; Hawkins, 
who had charge of the royal ships ; and Frobisher, 
who had but recently returned from his Arctic expedi- 
tion. To these were subsequently added many other 
well-known men, such as Raleigh and the younger 
Cecils, who fitted out ships of their own, sailed out of 
the southern ports and joined in the attack. The 
squadron in the Straits of Dover was commanded by 
Lord Seymour, a son of the Protector Somerset. 

The English allowed the Armada to pass before 
Plymouth, whence it was seen in crescent formation, 
seven miles from horn to horn, and to get well into 
the Channel before they began to attack it seriously. 
But as soon as it was fairly in the narrow seas they 
proceeded to manoeuvre round it, delivering a series 
of attacks and cutting off all stragglers. First blood 
fell to Drake, who captured " the great galleon of 
Andalusia " and a large ship in which much treasure 
had been stored. Medina Sidonia made but little 
effort to repel the attacks ; he felt bound to hasten to 
join Parma as quickly as possible, and foolishly true to 
the plan of operations bore steadily up Channel. For 
ten days the running fight continued ; the English 
were unable to stay the advance of the Armada and 
did really very little actual damage to it, but each day 
they gained confidence while the Spaniards became 



DEFEAT OF THE ARMADA 253 

demoralised. At last Calais was reached, but there 
Medina Sidonia learnt that Parma was now blockaded 
by the Dutch, and accordingly not feeling equal to 
fighting a battle at once, cast anchor and resolved to 
give his men a short rest. But he had not made 
allowance for the daring of the English. During the 
night eight fire-ships were sent into the midst of the 
Spanish fleet, which being crowded together and now 
filled with panic, fell into the utmost disorder. The 
Spaniards cut their cables and attempted to escape to 
sea, but their enemies were waiting for them and they 
suffered heavy loss. To complete the disaster a 
storm arose which caused much destruction, and the 
coast of the Low Countries was strewn with wreckage. 
On the two following days the final engagement took 
place off Gravelines ; again the superior seamanship 
of the English carried the day, and the Armada as a 
fighting force ceased to exist. Abandoning all hope 
of success, Medina Sidonia thought only of making 
good his escape to Spain ; the wind settled his course 
and he fled northwards. The English pursued their 
defeated enemy as far as the Firth of Forth, where 
their supplies ran short and they were forced to 
abandon the chase. But the gales of the northern 
seas completed the work of destruction ; only fifty- 
three ships returned to Spain, the remainder were 
wrecked on the inhospitable shores of Scotland and 
Ireland, where the unhappy crews met with scant 
mercy at the hands of the barbarous inhabitants. 
Philip bore the news that all his fair hopes had been 
blasted with much outward composure, thanking 
God that the disaster had not been even greater. 



254 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

but the naval power of Spain had been irretrievably 
shattered and the destruction of the Armada marks 
the first step in the decline and fall of that country. 

For their success the English had been greatly 
indebted to fortune. The delay in the starting of 
the expedition, the result mainly of the death of 
Santa Cruz, and the storm which overtook the fleet, 
had enabled them to complete their preparations for 
defence, had given the Dutch time to co-operate with 
them against Parma, and had prevented the Guises 
from coming to the help of Philip. And the wind 
had favoured the fire-ship attack at Calais, had forced 
Medina Sidonia to retreat northwards, and had com- 
pleted the practical annihilation of the Armada. Well 
might Elizabeth regard the victory as the result of 
the interposition of a Higher Power and re-echo the 
exclamation of Deborah and Barak, "the stars in 
their courses fought against Sisera." For despite the 
elaborate measures taken to repel invasion, the navy 
and the weather saved England. It is true that a 
large army had been gathered together, and that the 
enthusiasm of the country had been great, but the 
soldiers, to whom the queen delivered a stirring oration 
at Tilbury, were untrained and ill-armed and com- 
manded by Leicester, whose incompetence had been 
proved already. They would have been no match 
for the victorious and experienced veterans of Parma, 
who was himself the first general of the age, and who 
enjoyed the prestige of many a victory. Had the 
Spanish troops effected a landing, there can be little 
doubt that they would have conquered England and 
changed the whole history of mankind. 



ITS RESULTS 255 

The immediate results of the defeat of the Armada 
were also of great and lasting importance. Not only 
did the English secure their independence, but thev 
also obtained the command of the sea ; the prestige 
of Spain sustained a severe blow, and England was 
for ever committed to a naval policy, to the fulfilment 
of her true destiny. The conduct of the Catholics in 
the great national crisis had shown that they were 
thoroughly loyal ; henceforth there was no possibility 
of a successful rising against Elizabeth, there was no 
chance of a forcible restoration of Catholicism, while 
England no longer required to stand on the defensive, 
but was able to adopt more active measures. And 
yet, at first sight, it seems that there was no change 
in foreign policy ; that the old plan of giving meagre 
help to Dutch and Huguenots was followed, and, in 
short, that half-hearted counsels still reigned f/upreme. 
Though the war with Spain went on, there were few 
vigorous operations; the destruction of Vigo (1589) 
by an armament, which had failed to restore Portugal 
to independence, and the burning of Cadiz (1596) by 
Howard and Essex, stand almost alone, and the other 
yearly expeditions against the Peninsula degenerated 
into mere raids. Elsewhere also assistance was, in- 
deed, sent both to Henry of Navarre and to the 
revolted provinces, which did something to save the 
Protestant cause in each country from destruction, 
but the armies were too small to accomplish anything 
noteworthy. 

But when the state of affairs abroad is taken into 
consideration, a reason will be found for this policy of 
comparative inactivity and it will be seen that Eng- 



256 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

land did really avail herself of the great victory over 
the Armada to assume the offensive, though not on 
land. The Duke of Parma had recovered Flanders 
and the southern provinces for Spain, but all that is 
now the kingdom of the Netherlands remained un- 
subdued and continued to defend itself successfully. 
The Dutch had acquired a fleet and this fact, com- 
bined with the new naval superiority of England, 
enabled them to hamper communications between 
Spain and the Spanish army ; the strength of Parma 
was subsequently dissipated by the duty of inter- 
vening in the quarrel between Henry IV. and the 
League, and, on the death of the great general four 
years after the defeat of the Armada, no successor of 
first-rate ability could be found to conduct a struggle 
which had proved to be beyond the powers of such 
men as Alva, Don Juan, and himself. In France, too, 
the balance of power was changed in favour of the 
Protestants, since the assassination of Henry III. led 
to the accession of his Huguenot namesake of Na- 
varre. The Catholic cause thus ceased to be the 
royal cause, and the weakness of the League, by 
compelling its leaders to rely on Spanish help, led 
many Frenchmen to imitate their English co-religion- 
ists and to assist a heretic compatriot, rather than 
share in the triumph of an orthodox foreigner. It 
was obviously against the interests of England to 
secure the complete victory of one party in either of 
these two countries. France, united and in enjoy- 
ment of internal peace, would become as great a 
danger to English pre-eminence as Spain had been, 
as she had herself been before the outbreak of civil 




Photo\ [Emery JValker. 

WILLIAM CECIL, LORD BURLEIGH (152O-I598). 

From a painting by Marc Gheeraedts (?) in the National Portrait Gallery. 



258 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

war, and as she actually did become at a later date. 
And already the Dutch were threatening English 
commerce ; while to free Flanders would have been 
to revive the old competition between Antwerp and 
London and to ruin the latter city. There was, there- 
fore, a very strong reason why the help which was 
given to the Continental Protestants should not be 
very great ; the right policy was to prevent Spain 
from recovering her provinces or dominating France, 
but not to hasten the cessation of the struggle in 
either country. But an even stronger argument 
against very active intervention, and one not based 
on considerations of temporary expediency alone, 
existed and was, perhaps, present in the mind of 
Elizabeth. In order to intervene decisively, it would 
have been necessary to send a strong military force 
to the Continent, and therefore to create a standing 
army. Had this been done, it would have been a 
retrograde movement, detrimental to all the true inte- 
rests of the country. England would have abandoned 
the pursuit of her destiny on the seas in favour of a 
vain and suicidal attempt to become a great military 
power. And the Stuarts would have had the army 
for which they longed ; an army probably with tradi- 
tions of victory to assist it, for Protestantism was the 
winning cause ; an army, at any rate, ready and able 
to secure the success of its leader ; an army which 
might well have made Charles I. absolute, and pre- 
pared the way for a French Revolution in England. 
But whether Elizabeth foresaw something of all this, 
or whether she was actuated by lower motives — her 
love of economy and natural moderation — at least 



ESSEX 259 

she refused to enter upon a vigorous military policy 
and practically confined active operations to the sea. 
There the English sailors gained many a success ; 
the ports of the south and west coast were filled with 
the treasure ships from Mexico and Peru ; the rich 
American colonies feared the daring robbers who 
burst upon them when least expected, and almost the 
only defeat sustained, when the gallant Sir Richard 
Grenville lost his life, was more glorious than a 
victory. The naval power of England grew greater 
and greater ; her commerce spread far and wide, and 
before the end of the reign the foundations, slight 
though they were, of the greatest colonial empire 
ever seen had been laid. And to Elizabeth much 
praise is due, whether she acted by accident or de- 
sign ; for at least she did much to turn the minds of 
her subjects to the ocean, rather than to the Conti- 
nent, and thus, indirectly perhaps, but none the less 
certainly, to contribute in no small measure to the 
success of the Great Rebellion and to the preserva- 
tion of the liberties of her country. 

The last years of the reign were occupied by 
the rivalry between Essex and Robert Cecil. The 
former was the successor of Leicester in the favour 
of the queen and advocated a military policy; while 
the latter inherited his father's position and contended 
that the future of England lay on the seas. And as 
in the earlier years of her reign, Elizabeth's heart was 
with her favourite, but her mind was with her minister ; 
and as Burleigh had triumphed over Leicester, so did 
his son over Essex. A rebellion, which broke out in 
Ireland under Hugh O'Neill (^1598), assumed danger- 



26o THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

ous proportions ; it was a revolt of the " wild Irish " 
against the centralising and organising policy of 
Elizabeth, and was only crushed with difficulty. 
Cecil took the opportunity which this revolt afforded 
to rid himself of his rival, under pretence of pro- 
moting him, and agreed to his appointment to the 
command of the army sent against O'Neill. But 
Essex made a treaty with the rebels which the 
government would not confirm ; and, smarting under 
the implied censure, he returned home without leave, 
only to be disgraced. The triumph of Cecil was 
completed by the imprudence of his rival, who made 
an insane attempt to recover his position by force, 
was arrested and executed (1601). Two years later, 
the great queen, who mourned her favourite and re- 
pented having consented to his death, passed away, 
also having signified her approval of the choice of 
James VI. of Scotland as her successor. 

The character of Elizabeth, a strange mixture of 
good and ill, of weakness and strength, may be 
regarded as being, so to speak, compounded from 
those of her father, grandfather, and mother. Her 
womanly side resembled that of Anne Boleyn. She 
was vain, fond of adulation, and capricious; while 
her deep-seated hatred to the idea of growing old, 
which caused her to shrink from naming an heir, 
and to dance as energetically as ever until illness 
confined her to her room, was distinctly feminine. 
From her mother, also, she inherited her somewhat 
doubtful morality and that vivacity which led her 
into more or less serious indiscretions. Like Henry 
VII. she was cautious and parsimonious ; she pre- 



CHARACTER OF ELIZABETH 261 

ferred diplomacy to war and grudged every sovereign 
which she had to spend. Even in the great crisis 
caused by the coming of the Armada, when every- 
thing was at stake, she attempted to economise in 
the granting of supplies to her fleet, and she quarrelled 
with Hawkins at an earlier date because he failed 
in a venture in which she had taken a share. Like 
the first of the Tudor monarchs, too, she was very 
unscrupulous ; caring nothing for promises, if her 
interest urged her to break them, and always ready 
to lie if the truth seemed likely to inconvenience 
her; and, like him, she inclined to be an opportunist 
and to procrastinate, in the hope that some accident 
might save her the trouble of coming to a definite 
decision. From Henry VHI. she inherited that 
strong Will, which could bear nothing in the nature 
of a contradiction ; that courage which enabled her to 
face even the secret danger of assassination without 
shrinking ; that capacity for choosing able ministers ; 
and that ability for ruHng men, which never deserted 
her. Elizabeth was a great queen, and it was not 
altogether without reason that the compilers of the 
preface of the Authorised Version styled her " that 
bright Occidental Star Queen Elizabeth, of most 
happy memory." But, to a certain extent, she was 
indebted for her success to her ministers, and it is a 
fallacy to regard her as altogether great. From her 
determination to enforce her will, she was many 
times led to acts of tyranny ; her caution sometimes 
degenerated into mere vacillation ; her diplomacy 
became lying ; and her moderation in religion passed 
into intolerance. Yet her reign was glorious and 



262 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

successful ; her name must ever rank high among 
those of the queens of history, cind, in short, the good 
in her character counterbalanced the bad. 

Elizabeth's nature is illustrated in a curious way in 
her constant negotiations with, a view to marriage. 
Her suitors came from all parts of the world and 
were men of the most varying character. The 
empty-headed Arran was suggested by the Anglo- 
phil party in Scotland ; the Archduke Charles was 
put forward by the party io England which desired 
to pacify Spain and the Catholics. " Froggie " 
Anjou " would a-wooing go whether his mother 
would let him or no " ; he was favoured by the 
Huguenots and their friends, but unmercifully ridi- 
culed by the wits of the time in those verses, which 
are now one of the best-known nursery rhymes. The 
mad Czar, Ivan the Terrible, offered to share his 
throne with the English queen, in competition with 
Eric of Sweden, who sent a cask of nails by way 
of delighting his proposed bride. With all these, 
Elizabeth played for a time, but eventually would 
have none of them. One man, perhaps, she might 
have married, the Earl of Leicester, who figures so 
largely in the Baconian* theory of the authorship of 
Shakespeare's plays. But the native good sense of 
the queen saved her from such an act of folly, and 
as for the rest, they merely served to gratify her 
vanity or to help her in her foreign policy by 
enabling her to play off one country against another. 
Her mind could not endure the idea of subjection to 
the will of another, and she was not sufficiently 
warm-hearted to be carried away in spite of herself. 




QUEEN ELIZABETH (1533-1603). 

From an engraving by William Rogers, 



264 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

The tyranny into which her strong will oftentimes 
led her is shown in her dealings with the Church and 
with Parliament. As has been seen, the persecution 
of the Catholics was in its inception largely political, 
but it acquired a religious character. Despite the 
sacrifices which the believers in the older creed had 
made at the time of the Armada, they were treated, 
if possible, with greater rigour after that date than 
they had been before, and for this latter severity 
there can be no justification, since the patriotism and 
loyalty of the Catholics could be no longer called in 
question. But Elizabeth displayed no more tolera- 
tion for those who deviated from her " via media " in 
the opposite direction. During the evil times of the 
Marian terror, numbers of English Reformers had 
taken refuge on the Continent and had mostly conr 
gregated at Geneva. And, when they returned on 
the death of their persecutor, they were strongly 
imbued with Calvinistic doctrines and were by no 
means disposed to regard the Elizabethan religious 
settlement as final. But the queen had as little 
sympathy with this extreme as with the other, and 
before long the Protestant dissentients felt her heavy 
hand. They were thus led to attack the whole 
system of the Established Church ; they protested 
against the remnants of " Popish superstitions " ; 
they declared against any trifling with the " Scarlet 
Woman " ; and they advocated the abolition of 
episcopacy ; while in such scurrilous productions as 
the " Martin Marprelate Tracts " they endeavoured 
to popularise their views. At the beginning of the 
reign, Elizabeth had entrusted the exercise of her 



PERSECUTION OF THE PURITANS 26$ 

authority as Supreme Head of the Church to a new 
court, that of High Commission, the procedure of 
which, despite the observance of the formalities of 
law, was such as to ensure that the Crown should 
almost invariably obtain a judgment in its favour. 
To this body, the task of punishing the Puritans was 
now entrusted, and so well did it do its work that 
few of the extreme reformers were able to preserve 
their connection with the Church without doing 
violence to their consciences. Contrary to the whole 
spirit of the Constitution, an oath was drawn up 
(1583) based upon the Canon Law, which was 
administered to all who were thought to hold 
Calvinistic views ; failure to take it resulted in 
deprivation or other penalties, and, at the sam^ 
time, numbers of persons were prosecuted for the 
publication of attacks upon the existing system and 
punished in every way short of being put to death. 
The English Church, indeed, ceased to preserve her 
boasted mean ; she still occupied a middle position, 
but she permitted no one to sta.nd on the one side or 
the other, and, abandoning her former moderation, 
she became a persecuting body. And, while she thus 
negatived the very principle upon which her justifi- 
cation rested, she caused, by her dogmatic conduct, 
the formation of new sects. Conventicles sprang up, 
and the prohibitions of the government and the 
anathemas of the bishops alike failed to stay the 
growth of Nonconformity. 

As they were the advocates of liberty of opinion 
in the Church, so the Puritans were also the sup- 
porters of political freedom in Parliament. At first 



266 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

sight, it is a little curious that, though they possessed 
a majority in the Commons throughout the reign, 
they should have done so little, and that their oppo- 
sition should have been so comparatively ineffective. 
But the reason is not far to seek. Elizabeth was 
immensely popular, and anger at her tyrannical con- 
duct was soothed by the feeling of deep gratitude to her 
for the ability with which she guided the State, and 
by the recognition of the fact that strong government 
was still the first necessity of the country. Rarely 
has any sovereign enjoyed such loyalty as did she ; a 
loyalty which could induce a man like Sir John 
Hawkins to do violence to his sense of honour by 
turning spy, which could cause the very victims of 
her tyranny to pray for her prosperity even as they 
suffered. And this personal devotion prevented the 
Commons from steadfastly opposing her wishes, and 
led them to acquiesce in her cavalier treatment of all 
who dared to oppose her sovereign will. At the 
same time, the strong Court party was formed by 
the creation of rotten boroughs, a practice which 
had begun under Edward VI. and Mary, and which 
was so freely used by Elizabeth that during her 
reign over sixty places received enfranchisement and 
returned nominees of the Crown. Elizabeth's policy 
was to compel the Commons to confine their atten- 
tion to ordinary business, to the registration of her 
decrees, and to carrying out her wishes. They were 
forbidden to touch upon the question of the succession, 
and roundly rebuked for daring to ask her to marry ; 
they were not allowed to initiate reforms or altera- 
tions in ecclesiastical matters, and the unhappy Mr. 



MONOPOLIES 267 

Cope was imprisoned for introducing his " Bill and 
Book" (1588), advocating a revision of the system of 
Church government ; and they were informed that 
they talked too much, and that their freedom of 
speech merely consisted in the right of consenting or 
dissenting. And it was not until the very last years 
of the reign that any successful resistance was made 
to the queen's wishes. Then, however, the Com- 
mons forced her to abandon the practice of granting 
monopolies (1601), grants of the exclusive right to 
manufacture certain articles, which had become a 
crying evil. This sudden determination may be 
attributed to the rise of a new generation, who had 
no longer that admiration for the queen which had 
characterised their fathers, and to that feeling of 
discontent which a long reign seems always to cause 
in a greater or less degree, and which makes long- 
lived monarchs unpopular in their old age. But, at 
the same time, the opposition had really been con- 
stantly growing in strength ; the protest against 
arbitrary conduct became more vigorous, and there 
were increasing signs that the days of personal 
monarchy were numbered. It must be noted, also, 
that, while Elizabeth ruled nearly absolutely, while 
she issued proclamations, which were in effect laws, 
and while her political opponents suffered punish- 
ment for their independence without being allowed 
to avafl themselves of the common law, yet all these 
acts were allowed under protest only. The Com- 
mons objected to the infringement of their privileges, 
and even vindicated them successfully, though not 
against the Crown, and the judges asserted their 



268' THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

independence by remonstrating against the constant 
practice of committing people to prison on the war- 
rant of the queen or of the Privy Council for offences 
unknown to the law of the land. In short, while the 
period is marked by many illegalities and much 
arbitrary rule, it is marked also by a growing sense 
of liberty. Under Henry VIII. the acts of the 
Crown passed unquestioned ; under Eliza^beth they 
did not. The nation was preparing for the struggle ; 
the clouds had gathered, and the storm was ready to 
burst as soon as an unpopular monarch succeeded — 
or rather as soon as the great queen was dead. 

Allusion has already been made to the material 
prosperity of this period, which resulted partly from 
the opening up of new trade routes and partly from 
the increased national vigour. The reformation of 
the coinage, which had become greatly depreciated 
during the last twenty years, was one of the earliest 
acts of the reign, and its completion gave much 
greater stability to commercial undertakings, since 
the foreign merchants regained confidence. And the 
increased commerce of the country was shown by 
many outward signs. This was the time when the 
first chartered trading companies were founded ; the 
Turkey Company and the Russian Company date 
from the Tudor period, and the close of Elizabeth's 
reign saw the beginning of the greatest of all under- 
takings of this kind, the East India Company. In 
one way these institutions did, perhaps, tend to 
hamper trade, since their charters expressly excluded 
English competition; but, on the whole, their creation 
was beneficial, since they gave organisation to effort, 




P^°^'''\ [Emery Walker. 

SIR THOMAS GRESHAM (? I519-1579). 

Fromr thepahiting by Sir Antonio More in the National Portrait 

Gallery. 



270 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

and they were able to influence the government much 
more than private traders would have been able to 
do. At the same time the foundation of Trinity 
Houses helped to secure ships against the dangers 
resulting from ignorance of the coast or the bad con- 
dition of harbours. Improvements were effected at 
the chief ports, and the custom of providing pilots 
arose, while before long the erection of lighthouses 
began. All such works were greatly encouraged by 
the patronage of the Tudor sovereigns. The founda- 
tion of the Royal Exchange by Sir Thomas Gresham 
was the outcome of the increased trade of London, 
and assisted in encouraging merchants to resort to 
that city ; while the old custom of contracting loans 
abroad was abandoned in favour of that of raising 
them in England. And Elizabeth, despite her parsi- 
mony, did not wholly neglect the navy ; she kept 
about forty vessels in constant pay, and whereas, in 
former reigns, ships had been hired abroad, the 
growth of shipbuilding now obviated the necessity of 
seeking for them in foreign lands. From her reign 
the English navy increased slowly but surely, though 
it was still composed of ships of an inferior type, 
and occasionally suffered seriously from temporary 
neglect. 

Nor was the prosperity of the time confined to 
commercial and trading circles. The agricultural 
depression, which had been so great a feature of the 
period immediately preceding this, was to a great 
extent removed by the introduction of superior 
methods of cultivation ; more labourers were required 
on the farms, and there was a marked revival in the 



SOCIAL CONDITIONS 2/1 

rural population. Moreover this was, in some ways, 
the golden age of Cornish mining ; the industry had, 
indeed, existed long before, but copper was now dis- 
covered, and thus the value of the mines and the 
number of men employed in them were greatly 
increased. At the same time, manufactures began 
to spread. Religious persecution drove many 
Huguenots out of France ; Elizabeth welcomed them 
to England, and they not only set an excellent 
example of application and perseverance, but also 
raised the standard of existence, and brought in with 
them new branches of industry. The manufacture 
of linen and silk was introduced, that of woollen 
goods, was much improved and far more widely 
extended, and perhaps the solitary instance of 
depression was found in the iron trade, which was 
unfavourably affected by the decrease of wood, still 
the only fuel for smelting the ore. Upon all indus- 
tries the important Statute of Apprentices had a 
great influence (1563). That influence was bad in 
so far that, by requiring a seven years' apprentice- 
ship, it lessened the mobility of labour, but it was 
good in that it tended to prevent the production of 
inferior goods, and led to each man seeking that part 
of the country which was best fitted for the exercise 
of his particular calling. 

The great centres of wealth were still mainly in 
the south, as they had been from time immemorial ; 
but there are signs that the North and Midlands also 
shared in the general prosperity, if not of the ulti- 
mate change in the relative importance of the two. 
Thus we find that Leeds is already " much enriched 



272 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

by its woollen manufacture " ; that Halifax is noted 
for its cloth trade, Manchester for its cottons, and 
Liverpool for its populousness, while Birmingham is 
"swarming with inhabitants and echoing with the 
noise of anvils, for here are great numbers of smiths." 
In short, the new towns continued to rise at the 
expense of the old, and the places which are now 
noted for their wealth and importance began to grow 
great at this time. The appearance of the rural 
districts, too, was changed by the springing up of 
those magnificent houses which are still to be seen 
all over England, and which were built in the style 
of architecture to which Elizabeth's name has been 
attached. The nobility ceased to live in the old 
castles, already shorn of much of their splendour by 
the abolition of the hosts of retainers who lent dis- 
tinction to them. The value of these fortresses was 
much reduced by the introduction of artillery ; their 
owners ceased to desire a stronghold from which 
they might defy the whole force of the realm, while 
the new men who bought lands were equally devoid 
of the old spirit of lawlessness. They now sought 
comfort rather than security, and, in short, became 
country gentlemen rather than nobles, and they 
formed the class which supplied the Justices of the 
Peace who became so important during the Tudor 
period. 

Although it resulted from other causes, the great 
distress of the Reformation era had been much 
aggravated by the dissolution of the religious houses. 
The poor had now nowhere to turn for relief; the 
laity were indifferent, and the clergy were themselves 



THE POOR LAW 2^3 

very often in need of charity, and generally incapable 
of assisting others. There was no organised system 
for dealing with the ever-pressing problem of the 
unemployed ; the course which was adopted was to 
punish " sturdy beggars " for not working, when it 
was frequently the case that, with the best will in the 
world, they could find no work to do. But the cry- 
ing nature of the evil led at last to the adoption 
of measures for meeting it, and the Poor Law of 
Elizabeth was the result (1601). By it the relief of 
the needy was entrusted to each parish, a rate was to 
be levied and to be administered by from four to two 
" Overseers," who were to find work for such as were 
able-bodied and to maintain the rest. The Act was 
by no means perfect, either in its conception or in its 
working, and it resulted in many abuses, especially 
owing to the anxiety of every parish to shift the 
burden of supporting the indigent as far as possible 
from its own shoulders. But, at the same time, there 
was at last a system, and any system was, perhaps, 
better than none at all. 

The Poor Law has also another kind of import- 
ance. A new unit was taken for purposes of local 
administration, the ecclesiastical parish. Ever since 
the manorial courts had begun to decline the parish 
meeting, or the vestry, as it came to be called, had con- 
tinued to increase in importance. Originally as- 
sembled purely to decide matters connected with 
the Church, it had very early in its history begun to 
concern itself with everything connected with the 
well-being of the parishioners, through the influence 
of the parish priests, who undertook the champion- 

19 



274 I'HE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

ship of their flocks against the baronial wolves. And 
now its existence was, so to speak, legalised ; certain 
duties were entrusted to it by Parliament, and it 
acquired a permanent place in the system of local 
administration. At the same time the appointment 
of the new "overseers" was entrusted to the Justices 
of the Peace, to whom the Tudors had given new 
importance by charging them with the major part of 
the local administration — or, more correctly, with its 
supervision. And as these justices were nominated 
by the Lords Lieutenant, who were in turn appointed 
by the Crown, and also had already assumed the 
functions formerly belonging to the sheriffs, local 
government was brought into much closer relation- 
ship with the central power. The result was two- 
fold : local institutions benefited from the increased 
organisation, and their new vitality reacted upon 
Parliament, which was thus better fitted for the task 
of defending the liberties of the whole country. 

It remains to notice one more event, or series of 
events — in some ways the most interesting and im- 
portant in the whole reign — the first English attempt 
at colonisation. After his voyage along the north- 
eastern coasts of America, in search of the North- 
West Passage, Frobisher conceived the idea of at- 
tempting to form a permanent settlement on the 
newly-discovered shores, but his efforts were defeated 
by the severity of the climate and the almost com- 
plete absence of gold, which afforded the primary 
incentive to all colonisation at that time. A subse- 
quent attempt by Sir Humphrey Gilbert had no more 
success. He did, indeed, formally annex Newfound- 




-S^^Tse RALEm '^ii \ 




SIR WALTER RALEIGH (? I552-1618). 

J^'rom Vertues engj-aving of a contemporary picture at Knole. 



2/6 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

land, and established a colony on the coast of 
Labrador (1576), but here again the cold was too 
great for the English settlers, and in addition, the 
natives were very hostile. Neither of these schemes 
ever became, as a matter of fact, much more than an 
idea, and the emigrants were only too glad to return 
home. But the project of colonisation found a fresh 
advocate in Raleigh, who was perhaps actuated 
principally by a desire to dispute the arrogant 
claims of the Spaniards and Portuguese to the 
dominion of the New World. He obtained a charter 
from Elizabeth, and, four years before the coming of 
the Armada, sent out an expedition, which was 
directed to attempt a settlement in a more southerly 
direction. Having reached the coast of Florida, they 
sailed northwards along the shores until they reached 
what is now Raleigh Bay, in the neighbourhood of 
Cape Hatteras. Here they found a safe anchorage 
in Pamlico Sound, and upon one of those islands, 
Ocracoke, which protect the harbour from the 
Atlantic, the first English settlement in America 
which had any claim to a permanent character was 
established (1584). For awhile all went well with 
the infant colony, to which, in honour of the queen, 
the name Virginia was applied ; but presently the 
friendship of the natives was lost owing to the indis- 
cretion of Sir Richard Grenville, who led a further 
expedition to the district. He attempted to extend 
the colony to the mainland, and, in doing so, unfor- 
tunately quarrelled with the existing population, 
the settlers having formed an idea that the natives 
were concealing the gold which they supposed to be 



VIRGINIA 277 

plentiful in the district. For a while the settlements, 
including one on Roanoke Island further north, con- 
tinued to struggle on, but in face of the local hostility 
and the lack of consistent support from England, 
their position was hopeless. The ultimate fate of the 
colonists is unknown ; they probably fell victims to 
the enmity of the Indians, and were either massacred 
or starved to death ; but the miserable survivors of 
the Ocracoke settlement were rescued and brought 
home by Drake, after having lived for something 
over two years on the American coast. One more 
attempt at colonisation was made before the death 
of the queen. Bartholomew Gosnold sailed to the 
shores of the future New England, but he also failed, 
and the only immediate result of all the efforts to 
establish colonies was the introduction into England 
of the potato and of tobacco, which were found in 
Virginia. But the idea of settling the coast of 
America remained, and in these various attempts 
may be found the^first beginnings of the greatest of 
all Republics, and of the British Colonial Empire ; 
those two creations of the Anglo-Saxon genius 
which have had, and still have, such a profound 
influence in the world. It is not without reason that 
the capital of North Carolina perpetuates the name 
of Sir Walter Raleigh, for though he actually failed, 
yet he practically originated a movement which has 
changed the history of mankind. Spanish colonisation 
merely tended to perpetuate in a New, all the evils of 
the Old World ; to spread despotism and moral, 
intellectual, and social degradation. But Raleigh, 
and those who followed in his steps, found a new 



278 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

land, where political and religious liberty might 
flourish ; where men might .worship God in their 
own way, and govern themselves according to their 
own desires. At a time when intolerance in Church 
and State appeared to be gaining the victory, the 
lovers of freedom found a fresh home in the New 
World, whence, at a much later date, their descen- 
dants returned to fight and to die to secure for the 
people of the older states the blessings which they 
themselves enjoyed. 

The reign of Elizabeth is, in some measure, an 
intermediate period ; during it the royal power 
reached its highest point, and during it also the 
last struggle between prerogative and liberty began. 
Under the Tudor sovereigns, the Monarchy, as has 
been seen, acquired a position of very great strength, 
and was able to commit many illegalities. And the 
last of that dynasty was, perhaps, more like an 
absolute ruler than any other king or queen of 
England. In every branch of the national life the 
royal power made itself felt. The Lords, temporal 
and spiritual alike, were willingly submissive ; the 
Commons were bullied into obedience, and every- 
where resistance was punished through the joint 
instrumentality of the two courts of Star Chamber 
and High Commission. By means of the Councils, 
created under Henry VHL, and by the establish- 
ment of courts-martial in other districts, a very large 
part of the country was practically deprived of the 
benefits both of the constitution and of the Common 
Law, while both these were infringed or modified 
through the medium of royal proclamations and of 



CHARACTER OF THE TUDOR RULE 2/9 

commitment to prison on royal warrant alone. A 
political and religious creed was promulgated under 
the sanction of the Crown ; the subject who dared to 
question it did so at his peril, and the oath ''ex officio'' 
(1583) seemed to establish an inquisition into the 
very hearts of men. But through it all the constitu- 
tion remained unchanged. The office of Lord High 
Admiral is at the present time, and for many years 
has been, placed in commission ; but its revival could 
be accomplished without any change in the constitu- 
tion. And so under the Tudor sovereigns the Com- 
mons had placed their power, as it were, in commission, 
but they reserved to themselves the right to resume 
it as soon as ever they deemed it advisable to do so, 
and to take again the same position . as they had 
occupied in Lancastrian times, when their power was 
at its highest. The very fact that the existence of 
the instruments, through which the royal authority 
was exercised, was sanctioned by Parliament, proves 
that there was no despotism, for a despot acts accord- 
ing to his own will alone, and knows no controlling 
or sanctioning power. Again, the protests which 
were from time to time made in Parliament, however 
ineffective they might be, prove that the theory of 
the limitations on monarchy remained intact. Even 
Elizabeth herself recognised this, since, in declaring 
that certain subjects were outside the province of the 
Commons, she tacitly admitted that certain other 
subjects were within that province. The contem- 
porary writers, moreover, are unanimous in declaring 
that the government of England is not an absolute 
monarchy ; and Hooker, Harrison, and Camden are 



280 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

at one in asserting that Parliament is the ultimate, 
the supreme authority in the realm. The theory, at 
least, of the time is clear. As one of these authors 
says. Parliament "has a supreme and over-ruling 
authority in making, confirming, repealing, and 
explaining laws ; reversing atteinders, determining 
causes of more than ordinary difficulty between 
subject and subject ; and, to be short, in all things 
which either concern the state in general or any 
particular person." 

But to say that the constitution remained theoreti- 
cally intact, though in itself enough to free the Tudor 
monarchy from the charge of being, strictly speaking, 
a despotism, is only a half truth. As a matter of 
fact, substantial progress was made during this period 
towards the establishment of real liberty, that is, 
towards the admission of the bulk of the people to 
the enjoyment of political power and to a preponder- 
ating share in the government. It has been already 
suggested that the nobles and the Church were the 
most vigorous and dangerous enemies of popular 
freedom. Their boasted services to the cause of 
political progress have been greatly over-estimated ; 
almost the best that can be truly said of them is that 
they prevented the establishment of an absolute 
monarchy, and that they secured certain legal rights 
for the mass of the people. And a very sharp dis- 
tinction must be drawn between legal rights and true 
liberty. In England at the present day the dumb 
animals may be said to possess legal rights, since 
cruelty to them is punishable by law, but they 
certainly have no liberty. And, just as the dumb 



CHARACTER OF THE TUDOR RULE 28 1 

animals cannot themselves enforce the observance of 
the law against cruelty, so the mass of the people, 
being also politically inarticulate, could not do so in 
England until the Crown gave them voices by the 
creation of Parliament. This new creation was not 
favoured by the nobles or by the Church. And even 
when the permanency of Parliament was finally 
established, it was dominated by the great men — 
the representatives, generally speaking, representing 
not the people, but the clientele of the nobles. Thus 
the first step towards true liberty of the people was 
the destruction of the monopoly of political power 
enjoyed by the great men. And this was accom- 
plished under the Tudors, for the policy of 
Henry VII. destroyed the power of the temporal 
peers, and the Reformation that of the spiritual. 

And when this had been done, the next step was 
to create a body of men sufficiently numerous and 
powerful to supply independent representatives. 
This also was accomplished under the Tudor rule. 
The good order which was maintained, and the 
warm encouragement given by the sovereigns to 
industry and commerce, led to a greater distribution 
of wealth ; and upon this was laid the foundation of 
the great middle class. And that class supplied a 
Hampden, a Pym, and a Cromwell ; it undertook 
henceforth the championship of the cause of liberty. 
At the same time, the Tudors educated this class — a 
necessary work in order that when the representatives 
reached the House of Commons they should have 
some experience in government, and should not, like 
their predecessors in Lancastrian times, fail through 



282 THE STRUGGLE WITH SPAIN 

ignorance. Their political education was accom- 
plished by the training which they received in local 
government, all the branches of which were organised 
and given a new vitality by the care of the Tudors. 
And so, when the time came, the Commons were 
able to offer effective resistance to the Stuarts, to 
conduct a war, and to assume the whole government 
of the state. 

In short, so far from being a time of reaction and 
of despotism, the Tudor period was a time of real 
progress, during which the liberty of the country was 
placed upon a more certain basis, since its preserva- 
tion was entrusted to a larger class of people, and 
during which the men were trained who were to 
undertake the defence of that liberty against a most 
powerful assailant. Before the close of the reign of 
Elizabeth the work of preparation had been com- 
pleted, and the growing independence of the Com- 
mons, which then appears, was not despite the Tudor 
rule, but the result of it. When, in conjunction with 
this positive work for liberty, the negative work of 
the Tudors is considered — their adoption of a rational 
foreign policy and their failure to create a standing 
army, as they might have done — then it must be 
acknowledged that, after all, Henry VII., Henry VIII., 
and Elizabeth, deserve a place little inferior to that 
of Edward 1. in the roll of " constitutional heroes." 
So far from their government having to bear the 
blame for the Stuart assaults upon liberty, it made 
resistance to those assaults possible, and did much to 
ensure the success of that resistance. 



X 



THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 



(1603- I 640) 



There could hardly have been a greater contrast 
between two rulers than that which existed between 
Elizabeth and her immediate successor. James was 
uncouth, untidy, and unwashed ; there was no dignity 
either in his gait or in his manners ; his language was 
coarse, his behaviour was effeminate, and his accent 
broad. Hitherto England, whatever the faults of her 
sovereigns might have been, had at least been ruled 
by men and women who were kings and queens in 
appearance ; now she was given over to the govern- 
ance of one who was better fitted, on the surface, to 
perform the part of a clown at a village pantomime. 
But, at the same time, the first Stuart had consider- 
able ability. He was well-educated and was no mean 
theologian ; he possessed that native shrewdness 
which is generally characteristic of the Scotch ; and 
he was endowed with a certain homely wit which 
enabled him to make occasionally apt retorts and 

sometimes to sum up a question in a telling phrase. 

283 



284 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

Unfortunately for himself, these very advantages 
tended to disqualify him for his position, since, while 
aspiring to be an English Justinian and to attain 
religious unity by argument, his very skill in debate 
led him to champion a side, and equally his real 
cleverness enabled him to convince himself that his 
mission in Europe was to be the peacemaker of the 
Continent. Supremely confident in his own wisdom,, 
he became a mere tool in the hands of flattering 
prelates and clever diplomatists ; Spain and the 
Episcopate bowed to his great mind openly while 
secretly leading him whithersoever they would ; and 
the combination of acuteness and obtuseness which 
made up his character prevented him from seeing 
that he was simply serving the ends of those whom 
he aspired to guide. In addition, the wealth and the 
apparent absolutism of Elizabeth had made a great 
impression upon James, who had been restricted in 
pocket and in power at home, and he hoped to find 
in his new kingdom an inexhaustible mine of gold, 
of which he could dispose at will. 

Such was the monarch who came to the throne at 
a time when the people were ready to assert their 
liberty and when the rival factions were ready to 
engage in open conflict The position of the 
monarchy could only be secured and internal unity 
could only be preserved by the exercise of great 
tact and excessive caution ; and neither the one nor 
the other had any place in the character of James. 
In any case a struggle was, perhaps, inevitable, and 
the new king was most admirably fitted to precipitate 
it. At first, indeed, all parties joined in welcoming 




Photo\ \^Emery Walker. 

KING JAMES I. (l 566-1625). 

From a painting in the National Portrait Gallery. 



286 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

him, but this was only because each party hoped 
that he would become its own champion. The 
Catholics took courage from his published writings 
and from his former leaning towards an alliance with 
the Guises ; the Puritans relied upon a continuance 
in England of the toleration which he had extended 
in Scotland to the Presbyterians, and the middle 
party, the Established Church, trusted that he would 
observe the maxims of Elizabeth. But his earliest 
acts showed that the hopes of the third section were 
alone, well founded, and the retention of Cecil as 
chief minister was regarded by the extremists as 
equivalent to a declaration against themselves. And 
so, before he had been a year in England, James was 
called upon to meet two plots, one of which — the 
" Main Plot" — was apparently directed principally to 
change the ministry; the other — the "Bye Plot" — 
to seize the king's person and compel the granting 
of the desires of the rival parties. The first was 
supported by Spain and headed by Lord Cobham 
and Raleigh ; the second was organised by a com- 
bination of Catholics and Puritans. Both were re- 
vealed to Cecil ; the minister treated them as one, 
and their only result was to secure him in power 
(1603). 

Before long, however, James gave a fresh cause of 
offence to his new subjects. On his way south from 
Scotland he had consented to receive a petition, to 
which the narrie " Millenary " was attached — since it 
purported to set forth the views of a thousand of the 
clergy — and which prayed for certain changes in the 
Prayer Book in the direction of Puritanism. Pleased 



JAMES AND THE CHURCH 2^y 

with the prospect of being able to exhibit his theo- 
logical learning, the king directed that members of 
both parties should assemble at Hampton Court and 
there attempt to arrange their differences in his 
presence, while he would act as judge. But when 
the Conference was held (1604), the Puritan delegates 
rashly advocated the abolition of Episcopacy. James 
had suffered in Scotland from the independence of 
the Presbyterians, who 'had used their pulpits to 
attack his political administration, and, fearing that 
the same condition of affairs might be established in 
England, he threw himself into the arms of the High 
Church party, summing up his opinion in the famous 
phrase " No bishop, no king." The only outcome 
of the meeting was the Authorised Version of the 
Bible, the compilation of which was now begun by 
the royal command. Far from gaining any real 
concessions, the Puritans began to suffer more 
severely than before, James declaring that he would 
" harry them out of the land " if they refused to 
submit. As a resuft, he alienated a very large section 
of the people, and his attempt to conciliate them by 
an equally severe persecution of the Catholics merely 
made matters worse. A few of the more extreme 
members of that party, indeed, combined together 
in a fresh conspiracy, the notorious " Gunpowder 
Treason and Plot" (1605). Led by Guy Fawkes, a 
Spaniard of good birth, they hired a cellar under the 
House of Lords and filled it with gunpowder and 
fuel with the intention of blowing up the king and 
Parliament. A timely warning saved the government 
and led to even more vigorous measures against the 



288 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

Catholics, but it brought no relief to the Protestant 
sectaries. 

The growing dissatisfaction, evidenced at this time 
not only in the formation of plots, but also in the 
continual protests of the Commons and of individuals, 
was greatly increased after the death of Cecil. James 
had wisely retained that minister and had created 
him Earl of Salisbury, leaving to him the real 
management of the State. As a result, a compara- 
tively popular policy had been followed, while the 
undoubted ability of Cecil, despite a certain servility 
which also marked him, is shown by the inextricable 
confusion into which the government fell after his 
death (1612). The king henceforth relied upon 
personal favourites, to whom he gave every honour 
and all power. Of these the first was Robert Carr, 
a Scotchman, who was successively created Earl of 
Rochester, a Knight of the Garter, and Earl of 
Somerset. His fall was caused by the suspicious 
death of Sir Thomas Overbury, in which both he 
and his wife were accused of being concerned. The 
countess was almost certainly responsible for the 
murder, but the whole truth of the matter was never 
revealed, and it is possible that the king was himself 
as guilty as his favourite. In any case, however, 
Somerset was exiled from Court, and George Villiers 
took his place (1616). Upon him James lavished 
honours even more liberally than he had done upon 
Carr, and in a few years he eventually received the 
title under which he is best known — that of Duke of 
Buckingham. The sole merit — if this was a merit 
— of these favourites was that they were possessed 



FOREIGN POLICY 289 

of more or less considerable personal beauty. For 
ruling England they had neither the energy nor the 
capacity, and, while the extravagance of the king in 
heaping wealth upon them caused much anger, his 
effeminate fondness for them created a general 
feeling of contempt. Accustomed, as they had been, 
to the dignity and strong-mindedness of Elizabeth, 
Englishmen felt almost horror, certainly repulsion 
and loathing, for the king, whose principal business 
seemed to be to tidy his favourites' clothes and 
exhibit towards them a maudlin affection, which 
would have disgraced a proud* mother if shown to 
an only child. 

James was equally unfortunate in his attitude upon 
questions of foreign policy. After their initial 
successes the Reformers had begun to lose ground 
all over Europe, for they were div^ided among them- 
selves by disputes upon abstract theology and were 
assaulted from without by the Society of Jesus — the 
most formidable organisation ever devoted to the 
cause of Catholicism. In the south. Protestantism 
was almost entirely extinguished ; in France, Henry 
IV. had secured his throne by an opportune recanta- 
tion, and, although the Huguenots were tolerated, 
they ceased to make progress ; in the Low Countries, 
the practical independence of the United Provinces 
was to a great extent counterbalanced by the rever- 
sion of Belgium to the older creed ; and in South 
Germany and in Poland there appeared a general 
reaction against the Reformation. To Englishmen 
it seemed that the work of Luther, Zwingli, and 
Calvin was destined to be undone, and the inveterate 

20 



290 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

hostility to Spain — the result of years of warfare — 
was intensified by the fear of an European combina- 
tion to restore the old order in England. Under 
these circumstances the pro-Spanish policy of the 
king was regarded almost in the light of treason to 
the nation. James was led to look favourably upon 
Spain by various motives, of which the principal 
were his admiration for the strongly monarchical 
government of that country and gratitude for the 
sympathetic attitude of Philip II. towards himself 
during the troublous years of his reign in Scotland. 
As long as Cecil was supreme, indeed, the policy of 
the late queen was continued, and if a necessary 
peace was made with Philip III. the attitude of 
England was defined by the marriage of Elizabeth 
Stuart to the Protestant Frederic, Elector Palatine 
of the Rhine (161 3); by the negotiation of an alliance 
between Henry, Prince of Wales, and a French 
princess, who was to be educated in the Reformed 
religion ; and by the despatch of troops for the 
support of the Protestant Union in Germany. But 
as soon as the minister was dead James gave free 
rein to his own ideas, and prepared to substitute a 
close connection with Spain for the existing doubtful 
peace. The unhappy Arabella Stuart, a descendant 
of Margaret Tudor and the wife of William Sey- 
mour, the representative of the -Suffolk claim, was 
imprisoned (161 1), and Sir Walter Raleigh was 
executed (16 1 8) in order to please the Spanish 
government, while, on the death of Prince Henry, 
negotiations had been set on foot for the marriage 
of Prince Charles, the only surviving son of James 




ARABELLA STUART (1575-1615). 
Fro??i an engraving by George Hwnble, 



292 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

and the Infanta Maria, a daughter of Philip III. So 
much did this idea appeal to the English king that it 
contributed to colour the whole of his foreign policy, 
and while the vast majority of his subjects were 
eager for him to intervene in the Protestant interest 
in the great conflict of the Thirty Years' War, he 
hoped to obtain the restoration of his fugitive son-in- 
law by means of mediation, and as a compensation 
for the great honour which he proposed to confer 
upon the Spanish royal house. Cons(^quently he 
gave Frederic much bad advice, with the best 
intentions possible, assured him of the pacific and 
gentle character of his enemies, and acquiesced in 
the sequestration of the Palg-tinate, on the verbal 
assurance of Gondomar that its restoration would be 
the dowry of the Infanta. But in England the royal 
policy was regarded as a base desertion of the cause 
of Protestantism, and as Tilly and Sptnola gained 
success after success and expelled Frederic from 
Bohemia and from his hereditary dominions, James 
became more and more unpopular. 

Meanwhile, from the very beginning of the reign, 
the relations between the king and Parliament had 
been more or less strained. In the initial session the 
Commons had asserted their privileges, declaring 
them, in their " Form of Apology," to exist by right, 
not favour, and at the same time hinting to James 
that he would not be treated with that consideration 
which had marked their dealings with Elizabeth. 
So persistent were they in the presentation of 
grievances that the king determined to attempt to 
rule without a parliament, and by means of " Imposi- 



JAMES AND THE PARLIAMENT 293 

tions," or customs duties, to raise the necessary 
revenue. He was fortified by a favourable verdict 
from the judges in the case of John Bates (1606), 
who had refused payment, and he issued a " Book of 
Rates " systematising his exactions. But the insuffi- 
ciency of the income derived from these sources soon 
compelled him to call upon the Commons once more, 
whereupon he was met with fresh protests against 
not only the " Impositions," but also against the 
arbitrary conduct of the Court of High Commission. 
A proposal to settle all disputes by fixing an annual 
income for the king — the so-called " Great Contract " 
(1609) — which was brought forward by Cecil, came 
to nothing. The judges summoned up enough 
courage to declare that the royal prerogative was 
limited by law in the matter of proclamations, by 
which the king had trenched upon the liberties of 
the subject ; an attempt to secure a favourable House 
of Commons by means of the " Undertakers " — men 
who would " undertake" to support the Crown — failed, 
and James dissolved the "Addled Parliament" before 
it had passed a single measure, and for six years 
ruled alone. But the people were now roused to 
resistance also ; the unconstitutional demands of the 
king were refused and the sums collected were far 
too small for satisfactory government. 

Recognising, therefore, that he would be obliged 
eventually to call another parliament, James devoted 
his attention meanwhile to the work of strengthening 
as far as possible his position, in view of the inevitable 
struggle. And he saw that a subservient bench of 
judges would be of very great assistance to him, by 



294 THE THEORY OE DIVINE RIGHT 

enabling him to appeal to the authority of the law 
with the certainty of a favourable answer. But the 
then Chief Justice (Sir Edward Coke), who had been 
useful to the Crown while Attorney-General, now 
showed signs of a disposition to resist the illegal 
acts of the king, and finally openly declared that 
Peacham, who had written but not published an 
assertion that James was unworthy to rule, was not 
guilty of high treason. From the royal point of view 
he was thus quite unsuited for his position, and it was 
important that he should be removed. An oppor- 
tunity was afforded by the case of " Commendams," 
in which a suit was brought against Niele, Bishop of 
Lichfield, for holding a living, which James had 
granted him, at the same time as his bishopric. It 
was argued by the prosecution that the living was 
not in the gift of the Crown, and that, even had it 
been, the circumstances under which it was held 
made the occupancy illegal. When the case came 
before the judges, the king sent word that the hearing 
should be suspended until he had given his own 
views upon it. The whole bench, acting upon Coke's 
advice, resolved to pay no attention to this order ; 
James demanded an apology and recantation, and 
when the Chief Justice refused to give a satisfactory 
answer he was dismissed (1616). By this action the 
Crown made a distinct advance towards arbitrary 
power ; henceforth the judges held their offices on 
the understanding that they would be discharged if 
they dared to cross the royal will, and, as a result, the 
whole machinery of the law could be used in defence 
of the most advanced ideas of the prerogative. The 



REVIVAL OF IMPEACHMENT 295 

effect is seen in the uniform way in which every act 
of the Crown under Charles I. was ratified by the 
judges, and the independence of the bench was not 
regained until it was finally secured by a clause in 
the Act of Settlement. At the same time, any 
barristers who dared to defend persons accused by 
the government were severely punished. 

When, however, Parliament did again meet, the 
Commons showed quite as much independence as 
before. Reviving their right of impeachment, which 
had fallen into desuetude since Lancastrian times, 
they procured the punishment of Sir Giles Mom- 
pesson and Sir Francis Mitchell, who had been 
holders of monopolies, for fraud and violence, and of 
the Lord Chancellor (Bacon), for accepting bribes 
from suitors in his court (1621). With regard to the 
Chancellor, the facts seem to show that he did not 
allow his decisions to be affected, and that he rather 
perpetuated an already existing practice, and it is to 
the credit of the king that he practically pardoned 
the most famous of all his subjects. But of greater 
immediate importance than these impeachments was 
the Protestation of the Commons (1621), wherein 
they declared that the liberties and powers of Parlia- 
ment were of right ; that Parliament should debate 
upon all affairs of national importance ; that freedom 
of speech and choice of times for discussion of all 
subjects belonged to Parliament ; and that any ques- 
tions as to the behaviour of members should be 
primarily dealt with by the Commons. In effect, 
this Protestation summed up all the grievances of 
the reign, and was practically a declaration that the 



296 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

Commons would no longer submit to the encroach- 
ments of the Crown. They had already petitioned 
against the Spanish match, and it was the abandon- 
ment of that project which led in the last year of the 
reign to a revival of popularity for the sovereign. 
Buckingham, indeed, who was regarded as respon- 
sible for the breaking off of the negotiations, became 
for a while a hero, and when James died, Charles 
ascended the throne with some prospect of meeting 
with general favour (1625). 

But the new king very soon proved to be a far more 
dangerous enemy to the liberties of the country than 
his father had ever been. He possessed very con- 
siderable advantages over James. He was gracious 
and kindly in manner, handsome in personal appear- 
ance, irreproachable in his private life, devout in 
religious observances, and, in short, as a man, could 
inspire admiration, affection, and even devotion. At 
the same time, he had a most exaggerated idea of his 
position and of his prerogative ; he was only too 
ready to accept the slavish maxims of his more 
extreme and servile courtiers, who endowed the 
royal office with attributes little short of Divine. 
And, possibly from these feelings, possibly from 
some constitutional defect, Charles had an extra- 
ordinary disregard for any undertakings which he 
might give in his public capacity ; the only vow 
which he ever kept was that of marriage, and he was 
utterly incapable of dealing in a straightforward way 
with his subjects. A promise from him was worth 
nothing, if given as king, and, though he was un- 
doubtedly anxious to do the best for his country, he 



CHARACTER OF CHARLES 297 

was equally determined that he would be a benefi- 
cent despot and not a constitutional sovereign. He 
appears, indeed, to have accepted the dangerous 
theory that there are two codes of morality — one for 
private individuals, one for monarchs ; and he was, 
in short, the best man and the worst king who has 
ever sat upon the throne of England, 

And with such a king there was little likelihood of 
any cessation of the conflict between Crown and 
Farliamenjt ; it is, indeed, not too much to say that 
the only possible ending, from the day of his acces- 
sion, was the destruction of one party or the other. 
The slackness which characterised the preparations 
for the war with Spain, which had begun directly 
after the breaking off of the negotiations for alliance, 
and the unwise marriage treaty with France, involv- 
ing as it did a partial toleration for Catholics, quickly 
combined to destroy the popularity of Charles and of 
Buckingham, and the attitude of the Commons was 
clearly shown in the refusal to grant tonnage and 
poundage for life, and in the niggardly subsidy which 
was offered. From this time until the meeting of the 
Long Parliament the history of the reign is a long 
record of strife between the two parties and of the 
failure of the royal attempt to rule unrestrictedly ; of 
incapacity in the government, and of growing discon- 
tent among the people. Charles almost at once 
committed a serious mistake ; he consented to lend 
ships to Richelieu, by whom they were utilised for the 
attack upon the Huguenot stronghold at Rochelle ; 
and though the home government had possibly never 
intended that this should happen, they were regarded 



298 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

as deliberately forwarding the cause of Catholicism. 
Despite the urgent messages of the king, who was 
deeply involved with the German Protestants, the 
Commons refused to grant supplies until grievances 
had been redressed, and the first Parliament of the 
reign was dissolved. Before the second Parliament 
met, Charles attempted to gain popularity by a 
spirited foreign policy. A large armament was des- 
patched to Spain, but it was altogether unsuccessful. 
Its leader, Edward Cecil (Lord Wimbledon), was 
hopelessly incompetent ; the soldiers, who were 
landed near Cadiz, only distinguished themselves by 
getting intoxicated, and the failure to take that 
town was followed by an equally futile effort to 
capture some American gold-ships (1625). Far from 
winning popularity for the king, the expedition 
merely served to irritate the people still more, 
partly owing to its complete failure, partly owing 
to the arbitrary manner in which the necessary 
supplies had been raised. 

When, therefore, Parliament met, the Commons 
insisted more vigorously than ever upon the necessity 
of redress for their grievances, and appointed com- 
mittees to inquire into abuses both in Church and 
State. They further began to attack Buckingham, 
and, despite the royal declaration that the minister 
had acted according to the king's wishes, and that 
therefore his doings ought not to be called in ques- 
tion, they proceeded to impeach him. Angry at this 
conduct, Charles again dissolved his Parliament, and 
made his first attempt to rule without one. To sup- 
ply the necessary funds, tonnage and poundage were 




Phot6\ \Emery Walker. 

SIR FRANCIS BACON (1561-1626). 

From the painting by Paul Van Somer in the National Portrait 

Gallery. 



300 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

levied, although they had not been granted, and all 
who resisted these and other exactions vverfe sum- 
marily imprisoned. One of the victims, Darnel, sued 
out his writ of Jiabeas corpus^ but the judges held thar 
the discretionary powers of the king allowed him to 
commit persons to prison without assigning any 
definite reason, and thus tacitly acknowledged that 
the same power permitted the levying of taxes with- 
out the consent of Parliament (1627). But the finan- 
cial difBculties of Charles continued to increase, and 
while the war with Spain still went on he now 
injured his position still further by attacking France. 
Buckingham in person led an expedition to the relief 
of Rochelle, which was closely besieged by Richelieu , 
but he failed dismally, and the pecuniary necessities 
of the king became more pressing, while his unpopu- 
larity by no means decreased. He was now com- 
pelled to have recourse once more to Parliament, and 
to appeal to that body to grant him the supplies 
necessary for the conduct of the dual war. Despite 
every precaution, however, the elections went alto- 
gether against the government, and the first business 
to which the Houses devoted themselves when they 
met was the framing of a statement of their griev- 
ances. Together they drew up the famous Petition 
of Right, in which they protested against the late 
illegal exactions, arbitrary commitments, the billeting 
of soldiers, and the establishment of martial law, 
and to which they appended a request that reforms 
should be effected in these directions. Charles long 
hesitated as to whether he would receive the petition, 
but at last, seeing no other way of obtaining supplies, 



THE PETITION OF RIGHT 30I 

and having been assured by the judges that he need 
not fear that he would be bound by it, he consented 
to allow it to be presented, and added to it the usual 
words of assent— "Let right be done as desired" 
(1628). 

In tone this famous document, as Sir Henry Martyn 
asserted on behalf of the Commons at the time, was 
very moderate, being little more than an assertion of 
ancient rights and privileges which had been infringed 
by the king, and it might therefore have been hoped 
that Charles would in future refrain from the actions 
which had been thus reprobated. That he did not so 
refrain has been brought forward as one of the gravest 
charges against him, but there can be no real doubt 
that, whatever his moral obligations may have been, 
he was not bound in law. When he applied to the 
judges to know whether he would be unable hence- 
forth to imprison persons at will, they answered that 
there was no danger of such a result, and they were 
legally right in this reply ; for it is most important to 
note that the form of the document was that of a 
Petition, that no assent by the king could make it 
law, and that the reforms desired depended on the 
royal will alone, there being no doubt as to the 
perfect right of the Crown to act upon, or to refrain 
from acting upon, a Petition. Parliament, as a 
matter of fact, committed a great strategical blunder ; 
m their anxiety to avoid any appearance of innova- 
tion, they contented themselves with an assertion of 
ancient rights, as they expressed it, and thus they 
in nowise reduced the royal prerogative. The reality 
even of some of the rights claimed depended upon 



302 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

the document known as the De Tallagio Non Con- 
cedendo^ the Latin version of Edward I.'s Conjirinatio 
Cartai'urn, of which the authenticity was at least 
doubtful, having been denied or disregarded by the 
Plantagenet kings. Charles had, therefore, consider- 
able, if not complete, legal justification for his subse- 
quent conduct, and might claim some sort of moral 
justification also, when the Commons continued to 
put forward grievances, on the ground that by this 
action they had broken their bargain. For although 
they granted subsidies as soon as Charles had re- 
ceived the Petition of Right, they protested against 
the continued levying of tonnage and poundage 
without their consent, on the ground that these had 
been included under the general terms of the clause 
of the Petition dealing with illegal exactions, and, 
further, Buckingham was only saved from a fresh 
impeachment by the prorogation of the Houses! 

During the recess, the duke was assassinated ; but 
this caused no abatement in the vigour with which 
the Commons attacked various abuses. The arrest 
of one of the members for non-payment of tonnage 
and poundage led to a great outcry, and the king 
bowed before the storm to the extent of giving a 
verbal promise that he would not again exact the 
obnoxious duties. But other grievances were at 
once brought forward ; the temper of the Commons 
was obviously against the court altogether, and the 
king attempted to quell opposition by repeated 
messages adjourning them. This conduct alarmed < 
the leaders of the popular party. On an eventful day 
they refused to submit, and Holies and Valentine 



CHARACTER OF BUCKINGHAM 3O3 

forcibly held the Speaker down in his chair, while 
three resolutions which had been drawn up by Eliot 
were put to the House, declaring that all who 
brought in or favoured " Popish " practices in the 
Church, who held that tonnage and poundage 
might be levied without consent of Parliament, and 
who paid those duties, were enemies to the liberties 
of the country. While the soldiers of the royal guard 
were preparing to break open the doors of the House 
and expel the members by force, the resolutions were 
carried by acclamation ; the Commons adjourned 
themselves, and a few days later. Parliament was 
dissolved, Charles having already imprisoned the 
leaders of the opposition, and being now fully resolved 
to rule alone (1629). 

As has been mentioned, the king had already lost 
the assistance of Buckingham, who had fallen a 
victim to the fanatic patriotism of Felton at Ports- 
mouth, where he was superintending the preparations 
for another expedition to Rochelle. Few men have 
attained to such a- high position as did George 
Villiers, with such slight qualifications. His most 
notable achievements are the suggestion of the utterly 
senseless journey of Charles to Madrid, which resulted 
in the abandonment of the Spanish marriage scheme ; 
the subsequent war with Spain, which led to the dis- 
graceful failure at Cadiz ; the alliance with Richelieu, 
which was altogether a political error ; and the war 
with France, which surpassed even the alliance in 
stupidity. He had no great objects and no rational 
policy ; the only apparent aim of his conduct being 
to retain his own power and, if possible, to win popu- 



304 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

larity by means of military success. Something may, 
indeed, be urged in his favour ; his absolute incom- 
petence involved the king in even greater difficulties 
than those by which he would otherwise have been 
surrounded ; his extravagance necessitated a constant 
appeal to Parliament for supplies ; and thus he con- 
tributed indirectly to the failure of his master's 
schemes. In short, his faults and vices were in the 
end beneficial to the country, and the same sort of 
gratitude may be felt towards him as an opposition 
leader may be supposed to feel, when a Cabinet 
Minister commits an exceptionally bad blunder. 
He was replaced by two men of much greater ability 
— Laud and Wentworth, who were capable, at least, 
of devising a policy and of carrying it out. 

In the case of Laud, perhaps, any extreme feeling 
would be more out of place than in the case of any 
other historical personage. His character may be 
summed up in the phrase, " well meaning." For 
there is no doubt that he meant very well, indeed he 
was thoroughly, almost pathetically, in earnest in his 
little schemes and little changes ; little, that is, when 
thought of in connection with the great problems 
which were awaiting solution at the time. To him it 
was a matter of the most vital importance that the 
internal arrangements of one church should be as 
far as possible exactly like those of another, and that 
the preacher's surplice should be clean. He would 
have made an exemplary master at a small private 
school ; he would have shone on a local board ; but 
his passion for detail and his devotion to discipline 
and uniformity unfitted him altogether for the post 



LAUD 305 

of archbishop, at a time when sympathy and tact 
were most needful. On the one side, he was ready to 
imperil the Established Church for the sake of some 
trifling point of ceremonial ; on the other, he was 
prepared to involve the king in a bitter controversy 
with the majority of his subjects rather than allow 
one obscure clergyman to deviate by a hair's breadth 
from the narrow path of Laudian orthodoxy. But 
he was such a good man, so zealous and so amiable 
in his private life, that he must always receive some 
sympathy, although his character can hardly call 
forth either admiration or anger, and although 
respect for him must almost necessarily be tinged 
with a slight feeling of contempt. It may be added 
also, that the work which he did in enforcing greater 
order and more reverence was most necessary, and 
that the Church owes thanks to him for his reforms, 
while she may regret that he did not choose his time 
better and show more discretion in his method of 
reaching his ends. 

For politics, as politics. Laud perhaps had little 
enthusiasm ; and his eager co-operation with Went- 
worth in support of the royal authority, and his 
efforts to restore the Church to her old position in the 
king's councils, may be more justly attributed to the 
fact that he hoped in these ways to forward his 
ecclesiastical projects. But, in any case, he was at 
one with his far greater colleague in desiring that 
Charles should be absolute. If a neutral attitude is 
possible in estimating the archbishop's character, it 
is almost impossible to avoid partisanship in discus- 
ing that of Wentworth, the famous, or infamous, Earl 

21 



306 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

of Strafford. " That great person " had been the 
most ardent supporter of the opposition ; he had led 
the attack upon Buckingham and had suggested that 
the Petition of Right should be presented in the form 
of a Bill, but, almost directly afterwards, had ap- 
parently suddenly changed sides and appears hence- 
forth as the most ardent supporter of royalty. To 
account for this " apostasy " various theories have 
been advanced ; it has been asserted that he was 
bribed, that he was won over by the personal charms 
of the king, that he had never really believed in the 
cause of the Parliament, and that he was honestly 
converted. With regard to all these views, it may be 
said that not one of them contains the whole truth ; 
it is incredible that a man should be ready to die for 
a mere paymaster, or that a cold and calculating 
statesman should have been induced to change his 
policy for the sake of a few gracious words from 
a king ; and though much may be said for the 
remaining- explanations, they cannot be regarded as 
complete. It must be noted that Buckingham, who 
is supposed to have been the real object of Went- 
worth's opposition according to the one theory, was 
not assassinated untilsome time after the "apostasy" 
was accomplished, and it must be also noted that 
the other theory supposes a complete conversion to 
have taken place in little more than a month. As a 
matter of fact, the truth seems to be that, although 
there was a slight change in his views, it was not 
nearly so great as has been imagined. Wentworth 
was, paradoxical as the idea may seem, a moderate 
Liberal ; he desired to see the prerogative limited, 



308 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

but not destroyed ; he desired Parliament to be 
strong, but not absolute. To him it appeared that, 
if only Charles would honestly abide by the Petition 
of Right, all his objects would be attained, but he 
found that the other opposition leaders were not satis- 
fied with their victory and so he joined the royalist 
party. In doing so, his object was ultimately to 
bring the king to adopt a moderate policy, but 
immediately, so he thought, this was impossible. If 
he had to choose between royal and parliamentary 
tyranny, he preferred the former, and at present it 
seemed that the extremist attitude of the opposition 
necessitated the makmg of such a choice. According 
to this view, he was an exact prototype of the younger 
Pitt, a moderate reformer at last driven to become 
a strong Conservative by the revolutionary tendencies 
of the reforming party. He conceived it to be his 
duty to resist the democratic measures of the Com- 
mons and to secure first the triumph of the king, 
but, this done, he would have used all his influence 
in order to introduce moderation into the royalist 
councils. In short, he was consistent in advocating 
his moderate ideals. 

Without doubt he was possessed of abilities of no 
mean order. He had a strong will and a clear head ; 
he was above being influenced by small motives ; his 
opposition to Buckingham was not really personal, 
but essentially political ; and his desire for office was 
due to his firm conviction that in office he would be 
able to do good to his country. His chief error was 
a failure to appreciate the obstinacy of Charles and 
the hold which the exalted ideas of Divine Right had 



WEN T WOR TH 309 

taken upon him. As to his devotion to the Church, 
it may be safely asserted that this was political also ; 
for he was ready to favour any creed or sect which 
would further his ends — the Establishment in England, 
the Catholics in Ireland, and the Presbyterians in 
Ulster and Connaught. Just as Laud put religion 
before politics, and supported the royal cause in order 
to be able to reform the Church, so Strafford sub- 
ordinated religion to politics, and allied with the 
archbishop in order to obtain the necessary victory 
for the king. He was in all things essentially a 
politician ; unlike most men of the age, he was 
indifferent upon the theological disputes, which 
agitated the world ; and, unlike, very unlike, his 
colleagues on the royal side, he was great, resolute, 
and clear-headed. 

With such a minister, Charles might well have 
triumphed had it not been for his own weakness and 
incompetence, and for the blind intolerance of Laud, 
but, as it was, the measures of the government were 
badly conceived and worse executed. The king 
made the initial mistake of violently persecuting his, 
enemies in the late Parliament, and thus of convert- 
ing those into martyrs who had before been merely 
champions. Eliot, Holies, Selden, and Valentine 
were imprisoned, and thje brutality with which the 
first named was treated, before and after death, while 
it did nothing to further the aims of the king, roused 
a considerable amount of popular indignation. At 
the same time. Laud pursued his course of enforcing 
uniformity and of punishing resistance, unchecked ; 
all free expression of opinion was sternly repressed ; 



310 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

the Star Chamber inflicted punishments out of all 
proportion to the offences, and an insult to the episco- 
pacy or to Henrietta Maria was regarded as deserv- 
ing a penalty little less than that inflicted for high 
treason. For daring to call Laud " a little great 
man " in a private letter, Osbaldistone was con- 
demned to pay ;^5,ooo and to lose his ears. Prynne, 
who attacked stage-plays in his long, dull, and 
laboured " Histriomastix," and whose guilt was 
aggravated by the fact that he had libelled the 
queen, was fined a similar amount, and, further, was 
expelled from the Bar, placed in the pillory, and 
banished from the kingdom, after his ears, too, had 
been cut off (1637). Such punishments merely 
defeated their own object ; opponents of the Church, 
or of the government, who had possibly no particular 
merits, were glorified by the barbarity with which 
they were treated, and anger and discontent increased 
on all sides. Thousands of people lined the roads 
from London to the coast when Prynne and his two 
fellow-victims, Bastwick and Burton, went into exile 

affording a clear indication of the general feeling 

towards the Star Chamber. 

But still more vehement was the opposition, which 
resulted from the expedients adopted by Charles and 
his advisers to raise the revenue necessary for carry- 
ing on the government. In addition to the continued 
levying of tonnage and poundage, and to the constant 
heavy fines, inflicted for all manner of offences, 
advantage was taken of the complaisance of the 
judges to revive various laws, which had become 
obsolete from long disuse. All the king's measures 



SHIP MONEY 311 

were strictly legal, however much they might be 
opposed to the spirit of the constitution, and they 
were therefore defended by the majority of the 
lawyers from choice rather than compulsion. In law, 
Charles was completely justified in reviving and 
extending the ancient forest jurisdictions, and in 
punishing all who had, in the last two or three 
hundred years, encroached upon them; in compelling 
all who possessed estates of the value of £^0 or 
upwards, to receive knighthood, and to pay the con- 
sequent fees or fines due for previous neglect of the 
law ; and in fining those whose titles to their lands 
were invalid. Even the revival of monopolies, 
although they had been declared illegal by Act of 
Parliament, might possibly be defended. But despite 
all the devices which were adopted to raise money, 
the financial position of the king remained weak, 
until the ingenuity of Noy, the Attorney-General, 
appeared to have found a never-failing source of 
income. In the course of his antiquarian researches, 
that most industrious of lawyers discovered that, in 
the dim ages of the past the Crown had issued writs 
to the cities and counties on the coast, requiring them 
to provide vessels for the royal needs, and he sug- 
gested that this ancient right might be utilised once 
more. If very large ships were demanded, their 
supply would be impossible, and a money contribution 
might be exacted instead. Thus the king would 
be able to tax a large portion of his realm, while 
theoretically observing the constitution, and he would 
be justified not merely in law, but by the actual 
state of the navy, owing to the weakness of which 



312 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

the shores of England were then exposed to the 
ravages of pirates. Writs for Ship Money were, 
therefore, issued, at first to maritime districts only, 
but presently to the whole country — nominally in 
order to supply the very real needs of the fleet, actually 
in order to give the Crown a large and permanent 
revenue. And additional colour was given to the 
reasons openly assigned for this action, by the declara- 
tion that it was necessary to check the growing pride 
of the Dutch, on behalf of whom Grotius had written 
his great book " De Jure BelH et Pacis," setting at 
nought the time-honoured claim of the monarchs of 
England to the supremacy of the narrow seas (1634). 
But, despite the plausible arguments with which it 
was supported, the levying of Ship Money caused 
" more anger than any or all of the other exactions of 
the Crown. No one was so foolish as to suppose that 
all the money raised would be applied to the needs of 
the navy ; on the contrary, all recognised that it was 
likely to render the king quite independent of Parlia- 
ment. At first the judges declined to hear any 
arguments as to the legality of the writs, contenting 
themselves with declaring that they were issued by 
the royal command. At last, however, John Hampden, 
a man of some station, who had been prominent in 
the House of Commons, on the side of the opposi- 
tion, protested that the writs were illegal, and the 
judges consented to deliver an opinion on the point 
(1637). That opinion was favourable to Charles, as 
might have been expected, but he received merely 
a bare majority, on the ground that such acts were 
permitted by the " discretionary power " of the 



PLANTATION OF ULSTER 313 

Crown ; and thus the question as to the validity of 
that " discretionary power " was left for future 
decision. By the greater part of the people the 
result was regarded as a practical victory for 
Hampden ; resistance was encouraged, and many, 
who would have gladly paid as a voluntary act, 
objected to pay when payment was demanded as a 
right. Indeed, the position of Charles grew rapidly 
more critical, and the only hope of royal success lay 
henceforth in the outcome of Strafford's work. 

The great minister had been appointed to the 
Presidency of the Council of the North directly after 
his secession from the ranks of the opposition, but 
had been soon transferred to a more important post, 
the Lord Deputyship of Ireland. In that country 
the failure of O'Neill's rebellion had been followed 
by the "plantation of Ulster" (16 10) — that is, the 
northern part of the island had been filled with 
Scotch colonists, whose strong Protestantism would 
supply the English government with a permanent 
body of supporters. But the state of chronic unrest 
continued, and was complicated by the fact that the 
Irish Sea swarmed with pirates, who made com- 
munication with England dangerous, paralysed trade, 
and terrorised the coasts. Moreover, the army and 
the revenue in Ireland were in a state of hopeless 
disorganisation ; the violence of parties was accen- 
tuated by the divisions of the Protestants, resulting 
from the presence of the Puritan element supplied by 
the Scotch ; and only in the North were there any 
signs of prosperity. Lord Falkland, after attempting 
to raise the necessary supplies by concessions to the 



314 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

Irish in return for a voluntary gift, returned home in 
disgust at his failure, and in the absence of any Lord- 
Deputy matters went from bad to worse. The task 
of Strafford was, therefore, a most difficult one ; for 
he was to restore order, raise supplies, and form an 
army, which should be capable of effectively sup- 
porting the royal cause in England. And it says 
much for his ability that he did a great deal towards 
the accomplishment of these ends ; he cleared the 
sea of pirates, persuaded or compelled all parties to 
acknowledge his authorfty, created a revenue, and 
began to form an army. But partly from his own 
indiscretion, partly from the interference of Charles, 
and partly from lack of time, he eventually failed. 
For the attainment of his ends, he relied greatly upon 
the policy of playing off one party against the others, 
and consequently irritated all three. By filling his 
army with Catholics, he alienated the Protestants ; by 
enforcing Episcopacy, he angered the Puritans ; and 
by confiscating the Irish estates in Connaught (1636), 
to make room for new settlers, he roused the native 
population. And, too, Charles injured him by 
neglecting to observe his promise to his representa- 
tive that the disposal of patronage should be left in 
his hands, since Strafford was thus unable to redeem 
his undertakings to his friends. Finally, events in 
England moved too quickly, and the rash conduct of 
the king in Scotland led to the absolute ruin of his 
cause. 

It was probably upon the suggestion of Laud 
that an attempt was made to introduce the English 
Prayer Book, and Episcopacy on the English model, 



QUARREL WITH THE SCOTS 315 

into Scotland. James I. had already irritated the 
Scotch by his Five Articles, establishing various 
regulations, which were regarded as " Papistical " by 
the rigidly Calvinistic Presbyterians. By Charles 
much more vigorous measures were taken ; the con- 
fiscated Church property was resumed, and Laud 
asserted that he was, as Archbishop of Canterbury, 
supreme over the Scottish Church, and used his 
authority to introduce that good order and discipline 
which was so dear to him. Eventually a riot at 
Edinburgh led to disturbances all" over the country ; 
a committee of estates, known as The Tables, was 
assembled in place of the Parliament, which Charles 
had dissolved, and in opposition to the Royal 
Council, and the Covenant which had been drawn up 
in defence of Protestantism against Mary Stuart was 
again taken (1638). The king appeared to give way, 
but actually he was preparing to enforce his views 
by arms, and a Scotch army, consisting mainly of 
men who had fought in Germany, was collected and 
placed under the command of Alexander Leslie. So 
powerful was it that the royal forces did not dare to 
fight, and a pacification was arranged. But Charles 
was now determined to have his own way, and in 
order to obtain the necessary supplies, he at last 
called a Parliament. 

This assembly, to which the epithet " Short " has 
been applied, at once began to discuss grievances, 
and was, as a result, quickly dissolved. But the time 
for arbitrary rule had passed ; the royal army was 
inefificient and mutinous, a great council of Peers 
could do but little, and even Strafford himself could 



3l6 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

suggest nothing better than the calling of another 
Parliament. An armistice was concluded with the 
Scotch, who had already crossed the border, and six 
months after the dissolution the famous Long Parlia- 
ment assembled (1640). Charles had thus practically 
to confess himself beaten and to acknowledge that it 
was impossible for him to rule alone. It remained to 
be seen whether he could bring himself to consent to 
the abandonment of his theories of government, and 
to be guided and limited by the estates of the realm, 
whose views had become much more extreme in the 
eleven years during which they had had no share in 
the government. 

At first sight it may appear curious that, from the 
very moment of Elizabeth's death, the opposition to 
the Crown became much more determined, but the 
explanation of this fact is to be found in various 
causes, of which one of the most important was the 
entirely different theory of government which was 
adopted by the Stuarts. As has been pointed out 
already, the Tudors made no attempt and had no 
desire to overthrow or to curtail the liberties of 
England, but James and Charles deliberately tried 
to establish an absolutism. They were both firm 
believers in the Divine Right of Kings — a theory 
which had been originated to defend the Papal 
position as against the Empire, and which had been 
transferred to the service of sovereigns as against 
their subjects. Starting from the assumption, based 
upon the Bible, that all authority was from God, it 
was contended that Monarchy was a Divine institu- 
tion and that resistance to the government was con- 




Photd\ 



SIR EDWARD COKE (1552-1634). 



\Emery Walker. 



From the painting by Cornelius Jansen van Ceulen in the National 
Portrait Gallery. 



3l8 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

sequently resistance to the decrees of Heaven. As 
a logical conclusion, it followed that as the king was 
indebted to the Deity alone for his position, he was 
also responsible to the Deity alone for his actions, 
that popular interference was contrary to the revealed 
will of God, and that the monarch was, by Divine 
Right, absolute. It was, therefore, impossible for the 
Stuarts to admit, if they would be consistent, that 
the people had any rights against them ; the liberties 
of the country existed by royal favour alone, and it 
was optional for the Crown to continue to respect 
such liberties. In short, the Stuarts regarded their 
own authority as absolute, and doubted whether they 
even had the power of limiting themselves. To such 
pretensions, more dangerous in that age by reason of 
the appeal to the Bible, it was obviously necessary 
for the Commons to offer a strenuous opposition and 
to define clearly the rights which they themselves 
claimed. 

And in their resolution to resist they were 
strengthened at first by the nationality of the 
sovereign. To the vast majority of Englishmen, a 
Scotchman was abhorrent because he was a Scotch- 
man. Centuries of border warfare had caused the 
people of England to look upon their neighbours of 
Scotland as their national enemies. By the union of 
the two Crowns this antipathy was intensified, for 
James brought with him a crowd of needy retainers 
from the North, to whom the southern kingdom 
offered the prospect of speedy enrichment, with 
whom offices were filled and for whom lavish 
salaries were provided. Thus the immediate effect 



PARTIES IN THE CHURCH 3I9 

of the accession of a Scotch king was to increase the 
hostiHty between the two countries, and James was 
at once unpopular with the masses. This unpopu- 
larity was aggravated by the faults of his own 
character and by his attitude of partisanship upon 
the Church question. 

In the earlier days of the Reformation the Pro- 
testants had been united in their aims, they were 
at one in their desire to abolish papal supremacy, to 
reconstitute the Church on a truly national basis, and 
to do away with the more crying abuses of the old 
system. But when all these objects had been 
accomplished, differences began to appear ; the 
logical conclusion of the assertion of the right of 
private judgment was to cause the rise of parties, 
and, as time went on, the lines of division were 
deepened. After the failure of the Armada, many 
Catholics joined the Anglican communion, and 
combined with the more conservative Churchmen 
to form the High Church Party, which had a liking 
for more elaborate ritual, better order in the conduct 
of services, and a greater show of reverence, while it 
presently became tinged with Arminian doctrines. 
On the other hand, the Puritans regarded all 
elaborate ceremonials as an abomination ; they con- 
sidered that the attack of Arminius upon the views 
of Calvin might lead to a revival of Catholicism, and, 
in short, they considered that any approximation to 
the older creed was most dangerous at a time when 
the Jesuits were apparently triumphing on the 
Continent. And, as the bishops tended to be High 
Church, they soon adopted Presbyterian views, and 



320 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

came to regard the Episcopate as a door by which 
Catholicism might re-enter England. When James 
ascended the throne there was much doubt as to 
which side he would favour, but the subservient 
attitude of the bishops, one of whom did not scruple 
to declare at Hampton Court that the king was 
directly inspired by God, won him over, and he 
became a partisan. Charles, too, realised that the 
strength of the opposition to his political aims lay in 
the Puritan party, and he, therefore, joined eagerly 
in Laud's schemes. That archbishop was more 
concerned with ceremonies and Church government 
than with doctrines, although he was certainly 
Arminian in his views, but to his opponents his 
ritualistic reforms appeared to be simply the outward 
sign of his deeper plans, and he was, most unjustly 
in point of fact, accused of being a Catholic in dis- 
guise. And at a time when Spain was feared and 
when it was thought that the religious and political 
independence of the country was threatened by 
Jesuit intrigues, the charge was enough to unite the 
majority of the people in opposition to the Crown 
and to the Church. Further, the clergy were the 
most ardent supporters of Divine Right and of 
absolutism, so that the struggle was confused or 
intensified by the union of two distinct parties in 
the opposition — the friends of political freedom and 
the enemies of the established religion. 

In one way the Stuarts, although blindly, did a 
great service to their country by their ardent support 
of the High Church party. Persecuted at home, the 
Puritans, or rather a number of them, sought peace 



THE AMERICAN COLONIES 321 

in a new continent. Following in the steps of 
Raleigh, a company of adventurers had formed a 
settlement in Virginia early in the reign of James I. 
(1607), and, though its fortunes for a time fluctuated, 
it soon became prosperous, owing to the successful 
cultivation of tobacco. They were followed by the 
famous " Pilgrim Fathers " — Puritans who had fled 
from James's persecution, and who sailed in the 
Mayflower to Massachusetts (1620). By those men, 
for whose stern morality and dogged will admiration 
must ever be felt, the colony of New Plymouth was 
founded, and here the Protestant sectaries were able 
to find the freedom of worship which was denied 
them at home. Later still, the Catholics settled in 
Maryland (1638), which was granted by' Charles to 
Lord Baltimore, and to them belongs the great credit 
of having been the first to found a state where 
religious toleration was openly recognised. Before 
the outbreak of the Great Rebellion, Maine and 
Rhode Island had also been colonised. And the 
severity of Laud favoured the rise of the new settle- 
ments, for men of all stations in life— men, too, who 
were industrious and valuable citizens — crossed 
the Atlantic, and supplied an excellent population. 
And enjoying, as they did, almost complete inde- 
pendence, they transplanted in America those repre- 
sentative institutions, which seemed to be on the 
brink of destruction in the old country. 

But, while a colonial empire grew up in this way, 
the commerce and industries of England did not 
flourish in the same proportion. During the earlier 
years of the Stuart Monarchy, indeed, the maintenance 

22 



322 THE THEORY OF DIVINE RIGHT 

of the Elizabethan traditions favoured trade, and 
much progress was made in the organisation of such 
companies as the East India. On the whole, how- 
ever, the time was one of retrogression. The poverty 
and incapacity of the government allowed the navy 
to decay, the Algerine pirates insulted the weakness 
of England, and the Dutch disputed the mastery of 
the narrow seas. The former spirit of enterprise dis- 
appeared ; the foreign policy of James being, 
perhaps, responsible for this, since it ended the 
national crusade against Spain. Peace with that 
country was, indeed, requisite for England, but such 
measures as the execution of Raleigh, for treason 
nominally, really because he had fought the Spaniards 
on the Orinoco, were unnecessary and discouraged 
further adventure in the West Indies. And, presently, 
the attention of the people was rivetted to home 
affairs, and there was no longer any inclination to 
embark upon mercantile speculation. Industry was 
adversely influenced by the granting of monopolies ; 
the prosperity of the people was sapped by the royal 
exactions, and there are few bright points in a 
generally gloomy picture. Such as there are, are 
afforded by the draining of much of the Fens ; by 
some progress in manufactures both in Northern 
England and in Ulster ; and by an improvement in 
agriculture, as the result of the introduction of more 
scientific methods of cultivation. 

With the meeting of the Long Parliament, the 
struggle against the Crown enters upon a new phase. 
So far the Commons had attempted mainly to prevent 
the royal authority from growing greater ; they would 



GROWTH OF OPPOSITION 323 

have been content to leave the king his prerogative 
intact, and to allow him all the theoretical power 
enjoyed by the Tudors, while insisting upon the 
practical recognition of its limitations. But the 
Stuarts had shown that they would be content with 
nothing short of absolutism, and accordingly the 
character of the opposition changed. Hitherto the 
Parliament had been merely asserting ancient rights, 
its control over taxation, its power of calling the 
actions of royal ministers in question, and its duty of 
discussing all matters of state. Henceforth it goes 
further, and it attempts to acquire not only the 
position which it had enjoyed under the Lancastrians, 
but one even greater — to exalt itself at the expense 
of the Monarchy, and to assume gradually all the 
functions of government. In short, up to the time of 
the meeting of the Long Parliament, the opposition 
had been Conservative, it now becomes first Radical 
and then Revolutionary, until eventually resistance 
becomes rebellion. 




XI 



THE GREAT REBELLION 



(1640- I 649) 



It is with the meeting of the Long Parhament that 
the period of the Great Rebellion may be said most 
properly to begin, since, although the attitude of con- 
stitutional resistance was still maintained for a time 
by the opposition, yet it was the policy of the 
Commons in that Parliament, which eventually led to 
the outbreak of civil war. In the elections the royal 
candidates had been everywhere defeated ; members, 
to borrow a modern phrase, were returned with a 
mandate to put an end to the arbitrary proceedings 
of the king, and, as soon as the Houses assembled, 
the struggle assumed a critical aspect. On the very 
first day of the session, a speech upon the condition 
of the country was delivered by John Pym, a Somer- 
setshire lawyer, who had distinguished himself in 
previous parliaments as a strenuous supporter of the 
opposition. He assailed, with especial vehemence, 
the Earl of Strafford, whose pre-eminent ability 

marked him out as the first object for attack, and it 

324 




_, , , [Emery Walker. 

Photo\ ^ -^ . 

THOMAS WENTWORTH, EARL OF STRAFFORD (I593-I04I;. 

After Sir Anthony Van Dyke, 



326 THE GREAT REBELLION 

was resolved to impeach him forthwith for high 
treason. But the very multiplicity of the articles 
presented against the minister displayed the weak- 
ness of the grounds upon which the charge was based ; 
the brilliance of the earl's defence alarmed his 
enemies, and, fearing that he might after all escape 
them, the popular leaders determined to abandon the 
impeachment in favour of the less satisfactory, but 
more direct, method of a Bill of Attainder. The 
measure was rapidly passed through both Houses, by 
large majorities in the Commons, by seven votes only 
in the Lords ; the royal assent was reluctantly given, 
and the great minister was executed on Tower Hill 
(1641). Whatever may have been Strafford's faults, 
or even crimes, there can be no doubt that he was not 
■guilty of treason to his king, and the justification for 
the conduct of the Parliament lies in the fact that he 
was the most dangerous enemy to popular liberty. 
So great was his ability, that, as long as he lived, 
there was no security that Charles would not regain 
his power. Such was the feeling of the judges, and 
such is the only real apology for the execution. It 
twas a judicial murder, regrettable but necessary. On 
'the other hand, it appears to be impossible to find 
^any excuse for the king, on grounds either of morality 
or expediency. Twice had the royal word been 
voluntarily given that not a hair of the minister's 
head should be touched, and, although Strafford, with 
noble self-sacrifice, had urged his master not to 
trouble himself on this matter, Charles was morally 
bound not to allow the earl to suffer for the acts 
which he had done on behalf of his sovereign. And 



DEATH OF STRAFFORD 32/ 

the king was not intending to reform his ways ; he 
did not sacrifice Strafford, so to speak, as a peace- 
offering to the angry Commons, in which case, 
perhaps, it might have been urged that the royal 
assent was given to the Bill as a guarantee of good 
faith. But Charles acted dishonourably by all 
parties ; he gave up his truest friend from fear, to 
gain time for the preparation of his forces for the 
struggle, which he foresaw and which he intended to 
undertake ; and for him there can be no feeling of 
pity, but merely profound contempt. Weak, pusil- 
lanimous, cowardly ; the king abandoned Strafford, 
and destroyed the only man who might have been 
able to win him victory. And the entire futility of 
his baseness is shown by the fact that, within eighteen 
months, war had begun, and there was an end of his 
double-dealing. 

Meanwhile, the Commons, whose position was 
strengthened by the presence of Alexander Leslie's 
army in the northern counties, followed up their 
initial success by striking at all the existing abuses. 
The archbishop was impeached and committed to 
the Tower, other ministers were fined, more fled 
across the sea, and the royalist party seemed to have 
ceased to exist. In rapid succession the courts of 
Star Chamber and of High Commission, the most 
formidable instruments of despotism, were abolished ; 
Ship Money was declared to be illegal, and the Tudor 
Councils of Wales and of the North, of the county 
palatine of Chester and of the duchy of Lancaster, 
were done away. The first Triennial Act, declaring 
that Parliament must meet at least once in every 



328 THE GREAT REBELLION 

three years, gave stability to that body, and, as it was 
primarily intended to do, enabled it to raise loans, 
and thus to re-organise the finances of the country. 
By this measure there was established an elaborate 
machinery by which Parliament might meet despite 
the king, and it was followed by an Act which pro- 
vided that the present House of Commons should be 
dissolved only with its own consent. Both these 
measures were strictly unconstitutional ; for they 
trenched upon the acknowledged prerogative of the 
Crown, but they may be justified from the fact that 
Charles was undoubtedly only waiting for an oppor- 
tunity to rescind all his concessions. Moreover, the 
Commons disliked, in the words of the title of the 
Act, the " inconveniences which may happen by 
untimely adjourning, proroguing or dissolving," and 
they feared that, in event of a dissolution, the royal 
vengeance would fall upon their leaders. ^ 

The suspicion with which the king was regarded 
was greatly augmented by the events which took 
place in the recess. Charles visited Scotland and 
made great concessions to the Presbyterian party ; a 
course of action which was supposed to be due to his 
wish to win over the Scotch to his side in the quarrel 
with the English Parliament. And the alarm thus 
caused was increased by what is known as " The 
Incident" — an attempt to murder Hamilton, the 
Covenanters' leader — to which the king was accused, 
unjustly, of being privy (1641). At the same time, 

^ It is important to note that the Triennial Act did not provide for a 
general election every three years at least ; ttiat the duration of a 
House of Commons was in no wise limited. 



THE GRAND REMONSTRANCE 329 

events took place in England which served to render 
the popular leaders still more anxious. Many men, 
who had been leaders of the opposition, went over to 
the other side, including such eminent members of 
Parliament as St. John, Hyde, and Colepepper, and 
such peers as Falkland, and a new and stronger 
royalist party was thus constituted. The guard, 
with which the Commons had sought to protect 
themselves, was withdrawn ; the Tower was entrusted 
to Luneford, a royalist swashbuckler ; some signs of a 
Popish plot, organised by the queen, were detected ; 
and the royal jewels were pawned in order to supply 
funds for the king. Finally, a great rebellion broke 
out in Ireland, the Protestants were massacred in 
hundreds, and the Catholics proclaimed that they 
were acting on behalf of, and by the orders of, 
Charles, a false statement, coloured, however, by the 
fact that it was the royal attempt to revive the army 
created by Strafford which precipitated the revolt. 
And so, when Parliament re-assembled it was at a 
time of great tension, and of fear lest all that 
had been accomplished should be undone. 

It was this feeling of fear and of distrust of the 
king's sincerity which caused the drawing up of the 
Grand Remonstrance (1641), in which all the mis- 
deeds of Charles were set forth. It was a scathing 
indictment of the king's conduct throughout his reign, 
the manifesto of the popular party, and an appeal to 
all England to judge between the two sides. To 
many, it seemed to be an insult to a monarch 
who was trying to pursue a liberal course ; but it 
was justified by the conduct of Charles, which had 



330 THE GREAT REBELLION 

already proved to demonstration that to trust him 
would be little better than political suicide. And 
when it had been passed, by the narrow majority of 
eleven votes in a crowded House and after a long 
debate, it was clear that the king had now to choose 
between capitulation and open resistance, that the 
time for compromise had passed, and that by arms 
alone could the Monarchy secure the retention of 
that share of power which the Tudor sovereigns had 
enjoyed. Charles would have been better advised 
had he set up his standard at once, and declared that 
he would abide by his previous concessions, but not 
suffer himself to be compelled to grant more and 
more. But instead of thus taking a decided line, he 
committed a serious blunder, and one well calculated 
to bring over many waverers to the side of the 
Commons. Information reached him that the opposi- 
tion intended to impeach the queen on a charge of 
having conspired against the liberties of the country 
and of having intrigued with the rebels. Charles, 
whose devotion to his wife was extreme, at once 
determined to impeach the leaders of this attack 
upon her, and selected the " Five Members" — Pym, 
Hampden, Strode, Holies, and Haselrig — together 
with Lord Mandeville (1642). This act, if not 
unconstitutional, was at least wholly unprecedented, 
and, while it alienated many of the peers, its 
immediate effect was to render the Commons 
practically unanimous ; the articles against the 
members were voted a " scandalous paper," and many 
of those who had been in the minority on the Grand 
Remonstrance were now convinced of the hopeless- 



THE FIVE MEMBERS 331 

ness of expecting any genuine amendment from the 
king. On the same day, Charles appeared at the 
House with a bodyguard to arrest his enemies, but 
they had already found a safe retreat in the city, and 
the attempt did the royal cause even greater harm 
than the impeachment had done already. For the 
king had but recently pledged his word for the 
personal safety of the members, and his action thus 
made it evident that no reliance could be placed 
upon his oath, while its utter failure made him the 
laughing stock of his capital. By these two acts, 
moreover, the party of conciliation was effectually 
destroyed ; henceforward all men were either royalists 
or parliamentarians, all were striving in fact for the 
absolute triumph of one party or the other, and, while 
the Commons hastily passed a bill for securing for 
themselves the control of the m.ilitia needed in 
Ireland, the king left London for the north. To a 
measure which would have made the Parliament 
absolutely supreme, and destroyed the most ancient 
and undoubted prerogative of the Crown, the royal 
assent was naturally refused, and, indeed, the very 
introduction of the Militia Bill was a confession that 
war was inevitable. On the one hand, the Commons 
began to mobilise the trainbands on their own 
authority ; on the other, Charles, declaring the king- 
dom to be in danger, issued commissions of array. 
The governor of Hull, acting upon orders from 
London, refused to allow the king to take possession 
of the military stores under his care ; small conflicts 
occurred all over the muntry, and a state of open 
rebellion already existed, when the royal standard 



332 THE GREAT REBELLION 

was unfurled at Nottingham and all faithful subjects 
summoned to do battle for the Monarchy. 

In the war which was thus begun, the division of 
the country between the two parties was necessarily 
uncertain and confused, since it was essentially a 
strife of principles, in which even near relatives were 
to be found, oftentimes, upon different sides. On the 
whole, it may be said that the more backward portion 
of the kingdom — the North, Wales, and the West — 
favoured the king, while the strength of the Parlia- 
ment lay in the South and East, the seats of national 
wealth. The nobles were ranged almost equally on 
either side, but the merchants and trading classes 
were, on the whole, opposed to Charles, while London 
was the mainsta}/ of the popular party. Generally 
speaking, all who were more especially liable to be 
influenced by new ideas, and all who were particularly 
interested in a sound financial system, were Parlia- 
mentarians, since such men were generally either 
Puritans, or had suffered from the exactions of the 
Crown. On the other hand, the clergy were almost 
unanimous in their adhesion to Charles, who was 
further supported by many of the nobility, rather 
the larger number ; by the more moderate men, such 
as Falkland, from a sense of duty, and by the con- 
servative section of the population in religion as well 
as politics. In the initial stages of the war the 
royalist army was composed of "gentlemen," the 
Parliamentarian of tradesmen and artisans ; both 
suffered much from lack of military training and 
discipline, and the generals on either side were some- 
what incompetent. The royal forces were practically 




JOHN PYM (1584-1643). 

From a miniature by Cooper, 



334 THE GREAT REBELLION 

commanded by Prince Rupert,^ who was brilliant 
and energetic, but headstrong and rash. The 
Lieutenant-General of the Parliamentary army was 
the Earl of Essex, who was plodding, but very slow 
and nervous. 

In the first two campaigns the king was generally 
successful, and had it not been for two strategical 
blunders on his part he might have ended the war by 
the occupation of London. Immediately upon the 
outbreak of hostilities he advanced south-eastwards, 
fought an indecisive action with Essex at Edge'hill, 
which was for all practical purposes a royalist victory, 
and reached Turnham Green (1642). Here he found 
a hastily raised army entrenched, with the object of 
covering the capital ; and, with characteristic inability 
to seize an opportunity, he withdrew without fighting. 
The only tangible result of the first campaign was 
the occupation of the south-west Midlands, including 
Oxford, henceforward the royal headquarters. During 
the following year, however, the king's forces were 
almost everywhere triumphant. Sir Ralph Hopton 
annihilated the Parliamentary army in the West ; the 
Marquis of Newcastle crushed Fairfax, and conquered 
most of the North ; and the solitary failure was 
against the army of the " Association." This last 
was a force raised by the united eastern counties, 
with the dual object of protecting their own districts 
and of carrying on war beyond their borders. It was 
commanded by the Earl of Manchester, but the 
moving spirit in it was that of Oliver Cromwell. 

^ Prince Rupert was the king's nephew, being a son of the Princess 
Elizabeth and of Frederic, Elector Palatine. 



MAR ST ON MOOR 335 

After the successes of Newcastle Fairfax joined 
hands with this force, and together they stayed the 
tide of royalist progress. But Charles had at this 
time the fairest opportunity which ever fell to his lot 
of taking London, since between him and that city 
there was only the small and disorganised army of 
Essex. The king, however, went westwards and 
besieged Gloucester, in order to complete the reduc- 
tion of the Severn valley. Parliament succeeded in 
raising an army and relieving it, and the royalists 
failed even to intercept this force, which returned to 
its original posts near London after fighting a drawn 
battle at Newbury (1643)! 

But the failure of either side to gain any decisive 
advantage now led both parties to seek for allies. 
The king brought over the army which had been 
maintaining a doubtful struggle with the Irish rebels, 
with whom a truce was concluded, but it was de- 
stroyed at Nantwich by Fairfax. On the other hand. 
Parliament entered into an alliance with the Scotch ; 
the Covenant was taken, Presbyterianism was recog- 
nised as the official form of religion, and an army 
under Lord Leven crossed the border to co-operate 
against Newcastle. It advanced to form a junction 
with Cromwell and Fairfax. Rupert hastened to the 
assistance of the Marquis, and a great battle was 
fought at Marston Moor (1644). The Parliamen- 
tarians gained a complete victory, and resistance in 
the North was practically at an end. But at the 
same time the royalists had been successful else- 
where, and an attempt on the part of Parliament to 
recover the ground lost in the West had resulted in 



33^ THE GREAT REBELLION 

the capitulation of Lostwithiel, by which Devonshire 
and Cornwall were once more secured for the king. 
And at the second battle of Newbury, although both 
sides claimed to have won, Charles succeeded in 
forcing his way back to Oxford. It had become, 
indeed, evident that more competent leaders were 
required by the Parliament and that the personnel of 
the army must be reformed. This work of reforma- 
tion was undertaken by the rising party of the 
Independents, of whom Cromwell was the real 
leader 

Hitherto the management of the war from the 
Parliamentary side had been in the hands of the 
Presbyterians, who were essentially conservative in 
politics and dogmatic in religion. As a result they 
adopted an invariably respectful attitude towards the 
king personally ; they entrusted the chief commands 
to men whose very moderation made them averse 
to very vigorous action, and they would not raise 
regular forces; while their narrowness alienated many 
who would have otherwise actively supported them. 
As early as the battle of Edgehill, Cromwell, as he 
watched the rout of whole regiments before the 
cavalry of Rupert, had been convinced of the neces- 
sity of supplying the Parliamentary army with a 
motive of enthusiasm in order to counterbalance the 
devoted loyalty of their opponents. The incom- 
petence of Manchester further convinced his great 
subordinate that a redistribution of commands was 
essential to success, and the good fortune of the 
army of the Association proved that much more 
organisation was requisite. But to all such measures 



CROMWELL AND THE ARMY 337 

the Presbyterians were opposed, since they hoped 
against hope that some accommodation might be 
reached and the war ended without a decisive victory 
on either side ; and Cromwell was obliged to rely 
upon the Independents alone. It was with their 
assistance that the Self-denying Ordinance, declaring 
that members of either House should be incapable 
of holding military commands, was introduced and 
finally passed. In this way Essex and Manchester 
were compulsorily, though honourably, retired, and 
their places taken by Fairfax and Cromwell, for the 
benefit of the latter of whom a special dispensation 
was granted from the effects of the recent Ordinance. 
At the same time the army was reconstituted ; it was 
no longer a kind of militia, but became a regular 
standing force, which was quickly filled with men of 
strong religious convictions who were determined to 
triumph, and that completely (1645). 

The result of these methods was quickly seen in 
the rapid collapse of the royalist cause. After some 
preliminary successes, the combined Parliamentary 
army, under Fairfax and Cromwell, met the royalists, 
commanded by the king and Rupert, at Naseby 
(1645), and gained a complete and overwhelming 
victory. With it all hope of success for Charles 
practically vanished. His last real army, that in the 
West, was crushed by Fairfax, who soon afterwards 
took Bristol by assault, and Montrose, who had been 
successfully upholding the royal interest in Scotland, 
was defeated at Philiphaugh. The king still wan- 
dered about the country, but place after place 
surrendered to the victorious " men of religion." The 

23 



338 THE GREAT REBELLION 

last hope of Charles was destroyed by the untimely 
discovery of his negotiations with the Irish rebels, 
and eventually he surrendered himself to the Scotch, 
trusting that his person would be safd among them, 
and that he would thus have time to avail himself of 
the growing dissensions between the Presbyterians', 
who were still supreme in Parliament, and the Army, 
which was equally supreme "out of doors." But he 
soon found that this expectation was vain. The 
Scotch, after attempting to induce him to join them 
whole-heartedly, and finding that they could not trust 
him, retreated northwards, and finally, on the eve of 
recrossing the' border, handed him over to the English 
commissioners, who, in return, supplied them with the 
balance of the stipulated subsidy (1646). 

Having thus obtained possession of the person of 
the king, the Presbyterians were almost supreme, the 
one check upon them being supplied by the Army. 
That body they now ordered to disband, but the 
military " Agitators " urged their men not to sufier 
themselves to be deprived of all share in the fruits of 
that victory which their arms had won, and persuaded 
them to demand their arrears of pay as an excuse for 
neglecting to obey the Commons. And when their 
reply was met by the " Declaration," in which they 
were stigmatised as enemies of the State, the soldiers 
marched upon the capital and assumed a far more 
threatening attitude, while they improved their 
position by removing the king to their own quarters, 
not altogether against his will (1647). Still moving 
nearer and nearer to London, the Army next formu- 
lated its definite wishes, asking for religious tolera- 



THB SECOND CIVIL WAR 339 

tion, regular parliaments, and certain reforms in 
taxation and the law, wishes so moderate that they 
might have been granted had not the citizens of the 
capital, always strongly Presbyterian, encouraged the 
Parliament to reject them. Unable to obtain redress, 
the soldiers took up a position near Hampton Court 
in order to overawe their enemies, when the action of 
the king chartged the whole situation. Alarmed at 
the growth of the influence of the more extreme 
Independents, he suddenly fled to Carisbrook, and 
from that place organised what is known as the 
Second Civil War (1648). Isolated royalist risings 
occurred in many parts of England. The fleet 
declared in favour of Charles, and a strong Scotch 
army crossed the borders in his interest. But the 
common danger temporarily united Presbyterians 
and Independents. Fairfax reduced the South, 
Cromwell crushed the invaders at Preston, the help 
expected from France never came, and the fall of 
Colchester ended a thoroughly foolish and ill-advised 
attempt to revive active opposition. 

And its complete failure sealed the fate of the 
king. As a result of its victories the Army was now 
all powerful, and in it the violent " Levellers " had 
acquired a complete ascendancy, and were deter- 
mined not to allow Charles to retain his throne on 
any conditions. One last attem^pt on the part of the 
Presbyterians to complete the negotiations failed 
owing to the obstinacy of the king, who only gave 
way when it was too late, and the Army now 
• secured the subserviency of Parliament by means of 
" Pride's Purge." All the members who were not 



340 THE GREAT REBELLION 

ardent Independents were expelled, and the re- 
mainder, the " Rump," was wholly at the mercy of 
the military. It was resolved to bring Charles to 
trial, and for this purpose it was declared to be 
treason to levy war against the representatives and 
liberties of the people, and a High Court of Justice 
was appointed. When he was caused to appear 
before this body, the king naturally refused to plead, 
and equally naturally was condemned to death. 
Two days later he was executed in front of his own 
palace of Whitehall, protesting on the scaffold that he 
died a martyr to his zeal for the liberties, civil and 
religious, of his country. This claim and the calm 
courage with which he met his fate did much to 
enlist sympathy upon his side which was very far 
from being merited, but which served to obliterate 
the memory of his many misdeeds (1649). 

By all parties the execution of Charles I. has been 
regarded as at least a blunder, but it is hard to 
suggest an alternative course which might have 
succeeded. His death, indeed, merely revived the 
royalist party. Many who had opposed him were 
prepared to be reconciled to his son, and many more, 
including even devoted Parliamentarians like Fairfax, 
revolted from the idea of such violence. To the 
other courses, however, which might have been 
adopted there were grave objections. Charles had 
shown himself to be a man in whom no confidence 
could be placed, and whom no oaths could bind. He 
regarded it a:lmost as a religious duty to retain his 
absolute power, which, as he thought, had been ' 
entrusted to him by God. And had he been restored 



EXECUTION OF CHARLES 34 1 

to any degree of authority, however slight, he would 
have very soon attempted to regain his old position, 
to the constant unsettling of the country. There are 
equally strong arguments against the idea that he 
might have been deposed. In the first place, he 
would have made constant efforts to recover the 
throne, backed by the royalist party in England and 
probably by foreign help ; and in the second place, 
it would have been almost impossible to fill the 
vacancy. The other members of the Stuart family 
would have hardly accepted the crown. There was 
no rival dynasty to bring forward, and to the selection 
of some prominent Englishman there were obvious 
objections ; while the subsequent experience of 
Cromwell shows that even the greatest Parliamen- 
tarian could not safely ascend the throne. As long 
as Charles lived, indeed, he was bound to be a 
constant source of danger both to the liberties of 
the country and to its internal peace, and possibly, 
from a purely political point of view, the leaders of 
the opposition chose the lesser of two evils. They 
united their own party by an irrevocable bond, since 
they could hope for no mercy in event of a restora- 
tion ; and they showed that they were resolved at all 
costs not to allow the establishment of an absolute 
monarchy. 

The other question, that of the moral justification 
for the execution, must always be decided to a great 
extent in accordance with the view taken as to the 
rights and wrongs of the Great Rebellion. And in 
proportioning these, a sharp distinction must be 
drawn between the letter and the spirit of the con- 



342 THE GREAT REBELLION 

stitution. Charles was, during the earh'er .part of his 
reign, legally right, and equally the Parliament 
was constitutionally right ; at a later date, both 
parties resorted to measures which can only be 
justified by the necessities of civil war. According 
to the constitution, the king was entrusted with a 
Discretionary Power — a power which might be 
exercised in all times of danger, of which times, again, 
the sovereign was sole judge. In this way many of 
the royal acts can be justified, since the sovereign 
at every crisis could, as it were, temporarily suspend 
the constitution. But, at the same time, there was 
an understanding as to the use which might be made 
of this special branch of the prerogative, and clearly 
there was nothing in the condition of England or in 
the aspect of foreign affairs during the reign of 
Charles, to justify a constant resort to expedients 
only intended for use at the most critical junctures. 
In other words, the levying of various exactions was 
in accordance v/ith the letter and wholly contrary to 
the spirit of the constitution ; a fact proved by the 
necessity under which Charles and his advisers 
laboured of seeking for the justification of their acts 
in an appeal to distant ages since when the whole 
constitutional theory had been most profoundly 
modified — to ages, indeed, before Parliament existed ; 
when the whole system of taxation was different, and 
when Magna Carta and the Confirmatio Cai'taruin 
were still to come. 

And yet, after all, these arguments lose sight of 
the one real and eternal justification for the Great 
Rebellion and for all the acts into which that move- 




JOHN HAMPDEN (1594-1643). 

From Nugent'' s " Life of Hampden.''' 



344 ^^^ GREAT REBELLION 

ment led the men who organised and directed it. 
For this is to be found in the ends to which it was 
directed. In politics, at least, whatever may be the 
case in private life, the end very frequently justifies 
the means, and never had any opposition a more 
righteous or noble end. It was directed to the 
attainment of two objects — the preservation of the 
ancient political liberties of the English people, and 
the maintenance of freedom of religious thought. 
Had Charles triumphed, he would have established 
a civil government similar to that of France in pre- 
revolutionary days, and an ecclesiastical regime 
which would have compelled all to observe the 
narrow limits of Laudian orthodoxy. If it be held 
that popular government and liberty, civil and 
religious, are things not to be desired ; and that the 
ideal political system is that in which all power is, as 
far as possible, concentrated in the hands of one 
irresponsible person ; then, and only then, can it be 
held also that the Parliamentary leaders were wrong 
in resisting Charles, even to the point of civil war. It 
may be readily admitted that the measures of the 
opposition were legally indefensible and constitution- 
ally unsound ; that they violated the previously 
accepted canons for the regulation of the relations of 
sovereign and subject ; and that they were eventually 
characterised by a violence and bigotry, as bad as the 
tyranny of the king and, perhaps, even worse. But 
the principle, to the maintenance of which Pym gave 
up his life and for which Hampden died and Crom- 
well fought, was a right principle, and, while the 
excesses of the party must be deplored, its triumph 



OBJECTS OF THE WAR 345 

must be regarded as a blessing for the country by all 
who are not blind to the whole teaching of history. 
And, since it was necessary to this triumph, the 
Great Rebellion stands justified, and with it even 
the proceedings of the High Court of Justice. That 
body, most undoubtedly, had no jurisdiction over the 
king ; it was not representative of the majority either 
in or out of Parliament ; it was called upon to 
administer a law passed with the specific object of 
condemning a certain person and rendered retrospec- 
tive with the same object, and it had no real status. 
But, whether th^ people wished it or no, it was 
necessary to remove the king or at least to render 
him harmless, and, as has been said already, although 
it is easy to say that the execution of Charles was a 
blunder, it is not so easy to say what alternative 
course could have been adopted. In a time of such 
stress, strict considerations of morality had necessarily 
to be ignored ; and it is only upon the grounds of 
expediency that the act can be fairly judged. In 
short, while utterly rejecting the views of either 
extreme party, that the king was right or that the 
Parliament was right, legally and constitutionally, in 
all their acts, and while allowing that the position of 
either side was in many respects defensible and in 
many others indefensible, the Great Rebellion can 
only be regarded as productive of much ultimate 
good, and the victory of the Parliament as beneficial 
for England, whatever may have been the errors or 
even the crimes of its leaders, and however baneful 
may have been its immediate results. 

And that many of its results should have been 



346 THE GREAT REBELLION 

deplorably bad was inevitable, owing to the character 
of the two parties. Quite half the sympathy which 
is accorded to the Royalists is due to the popular con- 
ception of the " Cavalier " and " Roundhead." The 
former is usually typified as a man with long hair, 
well dressed, brave, generous, warm-hearted, and a 
gentleman. The latter is pictured as a man soberly 
dressed, hypocritical, snivelling, sneaking, and mean ; 
averse to all forms of gaiety, however innocent ; and, 
in short, all that is implied by the single adjective 
" dour," used in its very worst sense. And as is usually 
the case, the popular view is grossly exaggerated. 
The Royalists were not all like the Royalists of the 
so-called historical novel, and the Parliamentarians 
were not all like their representatives in the same 
works. And, while it is true that the king relied 
principally upon the upper classes, yet the Great 
Rebellion was essentially a war of parties, and many 
nobles and gentlemen were found ranged upon the 
side of the opposition. 

The average Cavalier was a man amiable in many 
respects, brave, commonly honourable, and probably 
more attentive to the fashions of the day in dress 
than his opponents. At the same time, he was likely 
to be licentious ; he was coarse, according to modern 
ideas ; and he was brutal, if judged by the same 
standard. He was, in fact, a seventeenth-century 
gentleman, a man not superior in general character 
to the Squire Westerns of a later date, and having 
both the virtues and the vices common in his station 
of life at that particular period. On the other hand, 
the average Puritan was in character the direct 



THE TWO PARTIES 347 

antithesis of his opponent Taken at his best, he 
was an intensely religious man, who looked for 
guidance to the Old, rather than to the New, Testa- 
ment, and who delighted more in the stories of 
righteous vengeance than in the mild precepts of the 
Sermon on the Mount. He was very stern, cold, for- 
bidding, a man whom it was almost impossible to 
like and almost impossible not to respect. And from 
his great hatred for worldly vanities, he became an 
enemy to anything which partook of the nature of 
frivolity ; he set constantly before him the pictures 
of Heaven and of Hell, more especially the latter ; 
and he regarded life in this world as a necessary 
journey to a better land, the pains and pleasures of 
which were little to be regarded. He was commonly 
a moral man, generally earnest in the performance 
of his duty, honest, and careful in his conversation, 
but, at the same time, he had many faults. The 
very depth of his fervour made him intolerant ; he 
was only too ready, so to speak, to " hew Agag in 
pieces before the Lord," and, profoundly convinced 
of his own rectitude, and unconscious of any tempta- 
tion to do wrong, he could make no allowance for 
the frailties of less fortunate men. And, in many 
cases, he was spiritually vain ; for, inasmuch as he 
believed that the Deity vouchsafed direct guidance to 
him in every moment of his life, he considered that 
he was immune from the danger of erring, and he 
justified any action, however bad it might appear to 
be, by an appeal to his God. Moreover, many 
Puritans were undoubtedly hypocrites, and hypo- 
crites of a peculiarly disgraceful type ; men who 



348 THE GREAT REBELLION 

shrank from no crime, and who protected themselves 
by professing that they were inspired ; who were ever 
ready to rebuke the vices of others, while being, at 
the same time, far more vicious themselves. And 
their hatred for everything which they considered as 
worldly, led them to attack all pleasures, however 
harmless ; to consider gay clothing ^s a mark of the 
" sons of perdition," and to restrict social inter- 
course, until the most riotous amusement was a 
prayer-meeting and the family circle was regulated 
like a camp. 

With two parties so vehemently opposed to one 
another not only in their political aims, but in their 
whole train of thought, excesses were inevitable. As 
Charles was convinced that absolute power was given 
him by the Deity, so his opponents conceived it to 
be a religious duty to exterminate " the enemies of 
the Lord " ; they imagined that to them, as to the 
Israelites of old, the Divine command had gone forth 
" to slay and spare not." And when they declared 
that the execution of Charles, for example, was 
ordered by Providence, they were not n'ecessarily, or 
even probably, hypocrites ; rather, they believed 
what they said and acted from the highest possible 
motives. And in this way, the death of Laud, which 
was really an act of useless and senseless cruelty, was 
undoubtedly regarded by its authors as a just punish- 
ment for one who had been a ready instrument in the 
hands of Satan to vex the children of God. The 
Puritans not only sought the guidance of Heaven in 
every event, however trivial ; they considered them- 
selves to be under the especial protection of the 



..-^ 




Photo] \^E)iiery Walker. 

WILLIAM LAUD, ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY (1573-1645). 

After the painting by Sir Anthony Van Dyke at Lambeth Palace. 



350 THE GREAT REBELLION 

Deity ; as occupying a position like that of the sons 
of Jacob, and as being cared for and directed by 
Jehovah. And this deeply religious feeling, which is 
almost inconceivable at the present day as actuating 
a great political party, was at once responsible for, 
and, in a sense, excuses, the many foolish and wicked 
deeds of the Puritans, whose acts can in nowise be 
judged fairly unless the spirit of that most remark- 
able century be taken into consideration. 

To this same cause must be attributed, in a great 
measure, the ultimate success of the Parliament. The 
royalists were animated by two feelings — by a sense 
of devotion to a person or, rather, to the institution 
which that person represented, and by a love of 
fighting for fighting's sake. Their cause was very 
dear to them, and for it they spent their blood and 
treasure, as is shown by the many instances of 
individual self-sacrifice. And, on the field of battle, 
a sense of honour impelled them to die rather than 
acknowledge defeat from an enemy whom training 
and tradition had taught them to despise. As has 
been seen, the early years of the civil war demon- 
strated the superiority of the " gentlemen of honour " ; 
the forces of the Parliament were, at first, essentially 
mercenary, and there was no principle which could 
move them to emulate their opponents in dash, 
courage, or endurance. But the genius of Cromwell 
saw both the cause of failure and the secret of success. 
Under his auspices the new Army arose, composed 
of "men of religion," who were only too ready to 
believe that their cause was blessed by Heaven and 
that they were fighting the battle of the Lord In 



CAUSES OF THE PURITAN VICTORY 35 1 

this way a motive for devotion, and a strong incentive 
to do their best, was supplied to the forces of the 
opposition ; and in the contest of rival principles that 
of religion won, because it was the higher, more 
inspiring, and more permanent principle. The 
Puritanism of the " New Model Army " was the truest 
cause of its success. At the same time there were 
other reasons, important, but not conclusively so, why 
the Parliament should have won in the end. Despite 
the generosity of his friends and despite his creation 
of a rival assembly at Oxford, Charles was handi- 
capped by the uncertainty of his financial position ; 
since the opposition were able to utilise the national 
credit in their capacity as representatives of the 
people. Their revenue, although scanty enough, was 
thus more certain than that of the king, and they 
enjoyed the almost unanimous support of the wealthy 
citizens of London. In their allies, too, the Parlia- 
ment were the more fortunate ; for while both Scotch 
and Irish were unpopular in England, the latter were 
the more hated as being Catholics, and the former 
were able to give far more effective assistance. 
Finally, the royalist leaders were no generals, whereas 
Cromwell stands in the very first rank among military 
commanders, and Fairfax was inferior only to his 
great colleague. 

It has been seen that, at the time 01 the Wars of the 
Roses, the other great period of civil strife in Eng and, 
the general life of the people was little influenced ; 
but all classes of the community were profoundly 
affected by the Great Rebellion. All intercourse 
between the two parties was practically suspended 



352 THE GREAT REBELLION 

during the progress of the struggle, and as each party 
drew support from every class, so all home trade was 
hampered even more than it would have been by the 
mere fact that internal strife was proceeding. And 
commerce was also restricted, partly from the same 
reasons and partly owing to the uncertainty of foreign 
relations, the countries of Europe being generally 
unwilling to enter into intimate relations with either 
king or Parliament, until victory had declared itself, 
the merchants naturally following, to a great extent, 
the example of their respective governments. Even 
the distant colonies in America felt the shock of the 
conflict in the Motherland, since the stream of 
immigration to them ceased with the meeting of the 
Long Parliament and the consequent prospect of 
toleration at home. At the best, the period is one of 
stationary prosperity, but it was only in such cities as 
London that even this negative success was achieved ; 
elsewhere there was a marked decline. And the 
absorbing interest which was felt in politics is illus- 
trated by the literature of the time, which was al- 
most wholly partisan. Whereas the reign of James I. 
had seen the production of such masterpieces as 
the later plays of Shakespeare and the " Novum 
Organon " of Bacon, the latter part of his son's reign 
could show little more than the controversial effusions 
of Prynne or the early Latitudinarians ; useful enough 
as contributions to the history of the time, but hardly 
works of much literary merit. 

In the Great Rebellion was seen the outcome of the 
Tudor policy of organisation ; for although it was, as 
has been said, a contest between parties, not classes, 



THE PARLIAMENTARY LEADERS 353 

yet the management of the opposition was largely, if 
not entirely, in the hands of these men, who belonged 
to the class entrusted with the administration in local 
districts. It is interesting to note that the Parlia- 
mentary leaders came generally, not from the towns, 
but from the rural districts. Pym was a native of 
Somerset, Eliot of Cornwall, Hampden of Bucking- 
hamshire, Cromwell of Huntingdonshire, Fairfax of 
Yorkshire. In other words, they were the represen- 
tatives of the especial proteges of the Tudors, the 
country gentlemen. And they brought to West- 
minster the experience which they had gained or 
had inherited from their fathers in the country. Had 
it not been for the Tudor policy in local government 
the opposition would have sought in vain for adequate 
leaders ; administrative ability would have been the 
monopoly of the royalists. But, as it was, the heads 
of the Parliamentary party had only, so to speak, to 
enlarge their sphere of activity, and to conduct the 
business of that party in accordance with the 
principles which they had learnt in the course of 
managing parochial affairs. When they had 
triumphed it remained to be seen whether they 
were capable also of administering a nation. 

And after the execution of Charles three great 
questions remained for solution. It was necessary, 
in the first place, to discover whether England could 
become a Republic ; whether the affections of the 
country could be weaned from that monarchical 
system which had existed from the earliest ages ; 
or whether a king was, indeed, essential to the peace, 
happiness, and prosperity of the people. Secondly, 

24 



354 ^^^ GREAT REBELLION 

it was necessary to decide whether the Parliament 
should be supreme ; whether it should really govern ; 
or whether the transference of executive powers 
altogether to that body was impossible, and only 
certain to lead to the despotism of that great 
military force which it had now called into being. 
And, lastly, it remained to be decided whether 
the new government could satisfactorily solve the 
religious difficulty ; whether it could reconcile the 
varying creeds, and establish either uniformity or 
toleration ; or whether the victory of the opposition 
merely involved the granting of coercive powers to 
one sect instead of to another. The solution of these 
problems was found in the eleven years which 
followed, and which ended with the restoration of 
the House of Stuart. 



XII 



THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 



(1649- I 660) 



The immediate effect of the execution of Charles 
was to cause an accession of strength to that very- 
party to which it was intended to be the final blow. 
In each of the three kingdoms the royalist cause 
gained fresh vitality from the death of its leader, and 
the Cavaliers, who had been a discredited minority 
since the collapse of the Second Civil War, obtained a 
majority in Scotland and in Ireland, and assumed a 
respectable position in England. The terror, indeed, 
of a victorious army in the last-named country kept 
their zeal within bounds, but elsewhere they broke 
out into open resistance to the shadowy Parliament, 
which claimed to have succeeded to the authority 
of Charles. At the same time the extremists in the 
ranks of the soldiery — the Levellers, the Fifth 
Monarchy men, and so forth — rose against their 
officers, preaching communism and godliness, and 
declaring that the day had come for the rule of the 

Saints on earth. It was a paramount necessity for 

355 



356 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

the continuance of the new Republic, for the per- 
manence of the lately inaugurated era of " Liberty," 
that the rising in Ireland should be repressed, and 
now the men selected for service there refused to go 
across the sea, accusing the government of having 
chosen all who were known to be opposed to them. 
But the growing spirit of mutiny was sternly re- 
pressed by Fairfax and Cromwell, the ringleaders 
were shot, and, despite one or two isolated outbreaks, 
order was quickly restored. A few officers were put 
to death, the men submitted and were pardoned, and 
the bulk of the Army was henceforth faithful. A 
strong and well-equipped force was prepared for the 
conquest of Ireland, and the command was given 
to the only possible general, Cromwell, who was 
appointed Lord Lieutenant by the Parliament. 

He had no easy task to perform. Since the Irish 
rebellion had begun eight years before, the condition 
of that island had been one of the most complete 
anarchy, and each of the three parties was engaged 
in open warfare with the other two. The Duke of 
Ormond, as the royal representative, had commanded 
a small English force in or near Dublin, but the 
king had withdrawn the best of his soldiers, and, 
being left at the mercy of the rebels, he had handed 
over the capital to Colonel Jones, a Parliamentarian. 
That officer, who had brought but a scanty body of 
troops with him, heroically maintained a doubtful 
struggle against vastly superior numbers. Mean- 
while the Catholics were ruled by a Papal Nuncio, 
and since their negotiations with Charles had proved 
abortive, were contending for complete independence. 




INI GO Jones's banqueting hall, Whitehall. 
From a print in the Grace Collection. 



358 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

Lastly, in Ulster the Scotch colonists were foes alike 
to Ormond and O'Niell ; and while nominally fight- 
ing for the Parliament, were really engaged in an 
attempt to secure their own freedom from all external 
control. Such was the state of affairs at the time 
of the king's execution, an event which served to 
reconcile all parties. Save for Dublin (held by 
Jones), and Londonderry (where Monk commanded), 
all Ireland became royalist. The devout Catholics, 
who had sent away the Nuncio, and the deeply 
Calvinistic Scots united in their desire to punish the 
regicides, and in begging Charles II. to visit his 
faithful subjects. The cause of the Parliament 
seemed well-nigh hopeless. 

But the genius of Cromwell was equal to the work, 
and his habit of making war in deadly earnest soon 
sufficed to quell opposition. He announced that no 
quarter would be given to garrisons which refused 
the summons to surrender. Drogheda, where some 
four thousand men were slain in cold blood, afforded 
a ghastly proof of his sincerity. At Wexford the 
same course was pursued, and after this his opera- 
tions were practically confined to the reception of 
formal submission (1649). Within a year the work 
of conquest was nearly complete, and the rapidity of 
his progress is almost a justification for his severity. 
For Cromwell has been held up to reprobation as a 
brutal and inhuman villain, and even now the hatred 
of the Irish for his name is not extinct. But although 
at the present day such conduct could not possibly 
be excused, the " massacre of Drogheda," when all 
the circumstances are considered, appears as little 



CROMWELL IN IRELAND 359 

more than an act of salutary severity. It does not 
seem to be true that any, save the soldiers, were put 
to death, and as they had received fair warning 
of the results of stubborn resistance, they brought 
their fate upon themselves. And the slaughter of a 
garrison which declined to capitulate was in no 
wise contrary to the ordinary practice of war at 
that time ; it was a course pursued by many generals 
on the Continent, and therefore regarded as lawful. 
Moreover, the pious hope expressed by Cromwell 
that such an example would save much bloodshed, 
both reveals, in all probability, the motive which 
induced him to give the order, and was actually 
fulfilled by the subsequent course of the war. In 
short, the severity shown, even if it were cruelty, 
was useful ; it saved Ireland from a very pro- 
longed struggle, and on these grounds may be 
pardoned. 

The affairs of Scotland compelled the Parliament 
to recall its general from the Irish war, the conclusion 
of which was entrusted to Ireton. Since their futile 
intervention in the Second Civil War the Scots had 
contented themselves with maintaining their own 
practical independence, and did not interfere with 
the affairs of the south until the execution of the 
king roused them to action. But soon after this 
event both the Covenanters and the old Royalists 
entered into negotiations with Charles II. On 
behalf of the latter party Montrose raised some men 
on the Continent, and landed in Scotland, but he 
failed completely. His fleet had been scattered by 
a storm, few reinforcements joined him after he 



360 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

had landed, and he was easily taken prisoner by 
the covenanting Duke of Argyle. His execution 
followed — an act of religious bigotry, which must 
for ever be a reproach to the Presbyterian party of 
the seventeenth century. Meanwhile, Charles, finding 
that the royalists were not strong enough to place 
him on the throne, callously disowned Montrose and 
accepted the rigorous conditions proposed to him by 
the Covenanters, as the price of their assistance. He 
landed in Scotland, and an army, under Leven and 
the younger Leslie, was assembled to support him ; 
while the Malignants — the true royalist party — were 
excluded from serving their king, and generally 
repressed. To meet this danger the Parliament sent 
Cromwell northwards, but that general was soon 
reduced to a position of grave danger. At Dunbar 
he was hemmed in between Leslie and the sea, and 
it was only the errors of his enemies, who left an 
impregnable position to fight in the plain, that saved 
him from certain destruction (1650). As it was, he 
gained a great victory, and was able to capture 
Edinburgh, and gradually reduce the Lowlands. In 
the course of this work, whether by accident or design 
is uncertain, he allowed Charles to pass him and 
enter England. Thither Cromwell pursued him, and 
at Worcester annihilated his army. The king escaped 
to the Continent, and the royalist cause was tem- 
porarily ruined beyond hope (165 1). 

The effect of the Irish and Scottish victories of the 
Army was to make that force absolutely supreme, 
and as Fairfax had retired into private life, Cromwell 
was henceforth the real ruler of England. And he 



GOVERNMENT BY THE RUMP ' 36 1 

at once turned his attention to the settlement of 
the government. Upon the death of Charles I. a 
Republic had been proclaimed. The House of 
Lords was abolished, some new members were 
elected, some old members were recalled, and the 
Rump, thus reinforced, arrogated to itself the title 
of a Parliament, and attempted to rule the country. 
But it met with strenuous opposition on all sides. 
The Levellers drew up " The Agreement of the 
People," which was a document embodying their 
political proposals ; and in face of the growing dis- 
satisfaction the government was obliged to name a 
date for its own dissolution. The critical turn taken 
by affairs in Ireland and Scotland, however, gave 
the Rump an excuse for prolonging its existence, 
and when the victory of Worcester had restored 
internal peace, it still clung to its ill-gotten power. 
Circumstances, however, soon arose which ended the 
rule of the Westminster oligarchs. The soldiers were 
angered by the arrogance of an assembly which they 
regarded as their own creation, and the dangers which 
threatened from abroad rendered a speedy settlement 
absolutely essential. To the suggestion of the Rump 
that the elections should take place in three or four 
years' time, the military naturally would not agree, 
and the financial expedients, necessitated by the out- 
break of the Dutch war, were at once ill-advised and 
unpopular. The Army petitioned for a dissolution. 
The all-powerful Cromwell hinted that this advice 
was good, and in great alarm, and with foolish haste, 
a Bill was rapidly passed for the purpose of creating 
a new Parliament. But the oligarchy, with a fatal 



362 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

disregard for the feelings of the country, introduced 
a proviso that they should themselves be ex-officio 
members, and thus made a last attempt to perpetuate 
their own existence. Cromwell was already tired of 
the ineffectiveness of the government. From his 
place in the House he upraided the unhappy Rump 
with its ungodliness and incapacity, and when he was 
called to order he effectually silenced his opponents 
by summoning in his guards. The House was 
cleared without ceremony, and the miserable remnant 
of one of the greatest Parliaments of English history 
was expelled by force, without the violence exciting 
a single pang of regret (1653). 

But although the Rump had been so long utterly 
discredited that no one, " not even a dog," mourned 
for it, a new political situation was created by its 
expulsion. For hitherto it had been the government 
of England, at least nominally, but now Cromwell, 
whatever had been his true position before, was 
exalted still further, in that he alone had any legal 
status, and it rested with him to settle the form of 
the constitution. And he at once entered upon those 
curious experiments in government-making which 
distinguish him from all others who have risen on 
the arms of a triumphant army to the height of 
power. Within three months of the dissolution of 
the Long Parliament he assembled that body which 
has been called indifferently the "Little," "Nominee," 
or " Barebones " Parliament (1653). It consisted 
solely of violent Independents, nominated by the 
great general. It altogether failed either to com- 
mand respect or to pass any useful measures, and 



364 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

when its violence was rebuked by Its creator, it 
voluntarily retired into the obscurity from which it 
had arisen. Having thus failed In his first attempt, 
Cromwell drew up the " Instrument of Government," 
a scheme mainly remarkable as affording almost the 
only example of a despot despotically arranging for 
limitations upon his despotism. He divested himself 
of that absolute veto which the command of an invin- 
cible army might have given him ; he assumed the 
title of " Lord Protector," but bound himself to rule in 
conjunction with a Council of State and a House of 
Commons ; and, as though he feared his own hasty 
temper, he bound himself not to put an end to any 
such House until it had sat for five months. In the 
interval before Its assembling he devoted his atten- 
tion to a reform of the law and of the franchise, the 
latter being an excellent project and well executed, 
and when the " New Model " Parliament met he 
prepared to enjoy the fruits of his disinterested zeal 
(1654). But again he failed. The Commons began 
to question the validity of their own existence, and 
attempted to curtail the Protector's authority. No 
progress was made towards a final settlement of the 
country, and having hardly borne with their follies 
for the requisite five months, Cromwell gladly seized 
the earliest opportunity to dissolve his second 
Parliament. 

After the second failure he ruled for a time with- 
out the assistance of any sort of representative body. 
The whole country was divided into districts, over 
each of which was placed a major-general, and 
England was practically governed like a conquered 



CROMWELL AND THE CHURCH 365 

land. But this system was distasteful to Cromwell, 
and extremely unpopular everywhere. Tracts, like 
" Killing no Murder," were published, and attempts 
were made both to excite an open rebellion and to 
remove the Protector by assassination. Even the 
iron nature of the great general was not proof 
against the constant strain of watching for secret 
enemies. His health was declining already, when 
he at last assembled his third Parliament (1656). 
The new assembly proved much more favourable to 
Cromwell than the previous Houses had been. It 
presented the " Humble Petition and Advice," urging 
him to take the crown, and it succeeded so far as to 
persuade him to assume a practically regal authority 
(1657). But the Protector soon quarrelled even with 
this obedient body. He wished to revive, in some 
sort, the House of Lords, the Commons were deter- 
mined to keep all power to themselves, and, after 
much disputation as to the relative status of the 
two Houses, Parliament was angrily dissolved. This 
would not have been the end of Cromwell's constitu- 
tional experiments had he not died shortly after the 
dissolution (1658). 

In the midst of all his efforts to find a satisfactory 
form of government, the Protector had ruled with 
moderation and ability. At home he kept a firm 
hand over all, the laws were rigorously enforced, and 
stern justice meted out, tempered, however, with too 
little mercy. In the matter of the Church, he acted 
in accordance with the views of the Independents ; a 
body of " Triers " was appointed, and any one who 
was orthodox in the Protestant sense, and whose 



366 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

moral character was good, was admitted to a bene- 
fice without respect to his opinions upon episcopacy 
or other similar matters. He met, however, with 
great opposition, the natural result of his policy in 
an age when partisan feelings were very strong. On 
the one hand, the royalists could not forgive him 
for his share in the defeat and in the death of 
Charles. On the other hand, the extremists of the 
Army were his deadly foes. They were generally 
republicans, and protested that the absolute rule of 
a gentleman from Huntingdonshire was no better 
than that of a king from Scotland. They were also 
violently religious. In their enthusiasm they could not 
understand Cromwell's toleration. They clamoured 
for a " Gospel " government, and they were angered 
by the spectacle of the Protector sanctioning such 
worldly frivolities as a dance at Whitehall. With 
the majority of the soldiers, indeed, Cromwell was 
very popular, so that resistance to him was hope- 
less, but he was the object of countless plots, of 
which the most important were the royalist con- 
spiracy of Vowel and the attempts of the Levellers, 
Sexby and Sindercomb. And, generally speaking, 
although feared and respected, he was also hated. 
Englishmen recognised the value of the good order 
which was preserved, but mentally rebelled against a 
state of society in which the slightest transgression 
was sure to meet with punishment. He had, also, to 
face another grave difficulty. The permanency of his 
government was not secured, and his authority had 
no legal basis. There was, therefore, a natural dis- 
inclination to supply money to him, while his right 



IRELAND AND SCOTLAND 367 

to levy taxes was questionable, and while his debts 
might soon be repudiated by a restored Monarchy. 

During the progress of the Irish war Cromwell 
had planned a great measure of confiscation, with 
the ultimate object of restricting the Catholics to the 
further side of the Shannon. The lands which were 
taken from the royalists and rebels were granted to 
English Puritans, and in this way a body of people 
who might be relied on to support the existing 
government was secured. Had the scheme been 
fully maintained, the greater part of the island 
would have been made Protestant ; as it was, it 
secured the ascendancy of that party for some 
years. But its utility was impaired by the measures 
of James II., and its greatest permanent result was 
to increase the already existing bitterness, since the 
hardships of the confiscation were remembered, and 
added to the causes of discord. During the Protec- 
torate, however, the mild rule of Henry Cromwell, 
Oliver's second son, maintained order, and did some- 
thing to conciliate all parties. 

In Scotland Monk was in command of an army, 
but Cromwell had anticipated the Act of Union, and 
the administration was amalgamated with that of 
England. The result was very satisfactory. There 
was a great improvement in trade and in industry, and 
the northern part of Great Britain enjoyed a measure 
of internal peace, such as it had not known before 
and did not again experience until after the battle of 
Culloden. In all three countries there was a tem- 
porary suspension of religious persecution, except in 
so far as the prohibition of the use of the Prayer 



368 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

Book disturbed the Episcopalians of England. The 
great revival in material prosperity affords a con- 
clusive proof of the generally beneficial character 
of the Cromwellian rule. 

In the matter of foreign relations, the policy of the 
Protectorate, although it led to a revival of English 
prestige, is open to very serious criticism. After the 
death of Charles I. the States of the Continent were 
little inclined to recognise the new Republic. Two 
of the envoys of the Parliament were murdered, with 
the tacit approval of the courts to which they had 
been accredited, and Charles II. was escorted to 
Scotland by a Dutch squadron. To Cromwell it 
seemed most necessary to assert the might of his 
country, and his ideas were thoroughly in accord 
with those of the originators of the Navigation Act. 
This measure, which provided that all goods should 
come to English ports in vessels belonging either to 
England or to the country producing the cargoes, 
was directed to destroy that carrying trade, which 
was the main source of wealth to the United Pro- 
vinces (165 1), The Dutch refused to obey such a 
regulation, and a naval war followed, in which Blake, 
De Ruyter, and Von Tromp gained much distinc- 
tion. For a time the success was almost equally 
divided, but eventually a decisive battle was won by 
the English off the North Foreland (1654). A peace 
was concluded by which the Provinces accepted the 
Navigation Act, and entered into alliance with their 
late enemies, a league joined by Denmark, Sweden, 
and Switzerland. Having thus made his power felt, 
Cromwell turned his attention to the realisation of 



CONQUEST OF JAMAICA 369 

his great ideal, that of making England the champion 
of Protestantism. With this end in view he joined 
France against Spain, and conducted a vigorous war 
all over the world. His soldiers co-operated with 
Turenne in Flanders, and acquired Mardyke and 
Dunkirk, fortresses of some value in securing the 
command of the Channel (1658). At the same time 
Blake sailed into the Mediterranean, chastised the 
pirates of Tunis and Algiers, extorted an apology 
from the Grand Duke of Tuscany, and alarmed the 
Pope in the Vatican. He did not, perhaps, actually 
accomplish very much, but he was the first English 
admiral to exhibit the naval power of his country on 
the coasts of Southern Europe, previous expeditions 
in the same direction having been little more than 
piratical raids by private individuals. Another expe- 
dition was sent to the Wost Indies with the intention 
of attacking Hispaniola, but it was badly organised. 
Its two commanders, Venables and Penn, were per- 
sonal enemies, and it failed to accomplish its original 
purpose. In the hope, however, of removing some of 
the consequent disgrace, it landed in Jamaica, which 
island was easily conquered, and, although the value 
of the acquisition was not realised at the time, the 
possession was retained and its progress encouraged 
by the Protector (1655). 

The vigour which had been infused into the 
government, and which appeared at home and 
abroad, raised England to a position of greater 
importance than she had enjoye'd since the death 
of Elizabeth. The alliance of Cromwell was valuable, 
as is shown by the intervention of Mazarin to end 

25 



370 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

the persecution of the Waldenses, which resulted 
from his desire to secure the friendship of the Pro- 
tector. But, although he thus increased the reputa- 
tion of his country, and although waggons of silver 
passing from Portsmouth to London bore eloquent 
testimony to the success of Blake, there was a funda- 
mental error in the foreign policy of Cromwell. In 
his zeal for the Protestant cause he regarded Spain 
as the great Catholic state, and adopted, in fact, 
the same attitude as Burleigh. But the empire of 
Philip II. had passed away, and, while its actual 
territorial extent was not greatly decreased, its 
energy had disappeared. On the other hand, 
France, thanks to the ability of Henry IV. and of 
Richelieu, was rapidly rising to that pre-eminent posi- 
tion which she held until the death of Louis XIV., 
and in allying with Mazarin Cromwell only assisted 
the rise of that power, against which his successors 
had to wage many a long war. It must be acknow- 
ledged, however, that he was as advanced as his 
contemporaries, who still believed in the strength of 
Spain, and that his fault was, after all, mainly lack of 
prescience, since there were no conclusive signs to 
show the change in the balance of power. 

The policy of Cromwell at once illustrates and, to 
a great extent, reveals his character. He was most 
intensely religious, trust in the guidance of a Higher 
Power appears in every line of his letters, and their 
nature precludes the idea that he was a hypocrite. 
But his religion was rational. He was not, like the 
" Fifth Monarchy Men," insanely violent ; on the 
contrary, the keynote of his Church policy was 




Copyright Photo\ t^^«^^'^ ^ '^^• 

OLIVER CROMWELL (l 599-1^58). 

From the portrait by Samuel Cooper at Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. 
{Reproduced by kind permission of the Master.) 



372 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

toleration of all creeds save one ; and that one was 
Catholicism, for which he had a great hatred, fearing 
its vast influence, and regarding it, as did most Pro- 
testants, as a creation of the devil. Otherwise he 
was content to live and let live. He was so far 
above the prejudice of the times as to welcome the 
Jews back to England, and his alleged iconoclasm 
has but little foundation in fact, the destruction of 
stained-glass windows and of statues having been 
accomplished by his namesake of the reign of 
Henry VHI., and having been attributed to him 
owing to his greater fame. And he was not really 
a very ambitious man. He had, it is true, that 
degree of ambition which is essential to great 
success, but it was national rather than personal. 
He desired to see his country great and respected, 
and he wished to go down to posterity as the founder 
of the new liberty in England. It was his misfor- 
tune to be obliged to rule as a military despot. His 
Parliaments would not work with him, and threatened 
by two extreme parties, he was compelled to rely 
, upon the Army, the only body of men which he could 
trust. It may be doubted whether he ever really 
desired the execution of the king ; it is certain that 
the duplicity of Charles was the primary cause of his 
death, and the sincerity of Cromwell's longing for a 
limited degree of power is almost proved not only by 
the frequency of his constitutional experiments, but 
also by the fact that such a man as Milton served 
him. On the other hand, he would never have con- 
sented to a restoration of the Stuarts. He was 
determined to be the head of the state, and he was 



CHARACTER OF CROMWELL 373 

profoundly convinced of his own administrative gifts 
and of the absolute integrity of his motives. It is 
uncertain to whom he would have committed the 
task of carrying on his work ; but he had probably 
no intention of founding a dynasty. His natural 
good sense showed him the obvious absurdities of 
hereditary rule when the ruler is not a king. For the 
rest, he was a general of first-rate ability. He was 
stern, but not cruel ; hot-tempered, but not revenge- 
ful ; a man of exemplary moral character, despite 
the scandals which were industriously circulated 
concerning his early years, and brave to a fault. 
He had no oratorical gifts — all his speeches are 
somewhat confused — but his zeal rendered them 
impressive in a certain way. Taking his good and 
bad points together, he was the greatest man of his 
age, and, perhaps, the greatest of all Englishmen. 
His very failure was magnificent, and success was 
beyond the power of any man to win. 

The Cromwellian system died with its creator, and 
the delight of the Royalists at the news that their 
great relentless enemy was no more affords an 
unequivocal testimony to his ability, and shows 
the revival of their own hopes. Indeed, from the 
moment that Oliver breathed his last the Restora- 
tion of Charles II. was certain. Richard Cromwell 
was, it is true, raised to his father's office, but his 
mild and feeble character totally unfitted him for a 
post which had shattered the iron nerves of the great 
Protector. He distrusted the Army, which, in its 
turn, despised him, and he attempted to rule with 
the assistance of a Parliament. But the Commons 



374 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

would not rest content with anything short of abso- 
lute power. They insulted the Protector, who did 
not retaliate, and they offended the generals, who 
at once ordered their dismissal. The Rump was 
brought back in triumph, but it had learnt nothing 
from past experience, and proved to be as intractable 
as ever. Assailed by it, Richard retired into that 
obscurity from which he had never desired to emerge, 
and a Republic of the old form was established 
(1659). ^ts existence was soon ended. The govern- 
ment attacked the Army, and Lambert, who aspired 
to be a second Oliver, expelled the Rump once more. 
For a short time England was ruled by the survivors 
of the former Major-Generals. 

But their authority was questioned even in the 
camp and weakened by their mutual jealousies, while 
in Scotland there was another army under the 
complete control of one ambitious man. Monk 
had watched the growing disorder in the south, and 
now he felt that the time had come for him to 
intervene. Crossing the border, he advanced into 
England, declaring that he was the champion of 
liberty. Lambert, who attempted to oppose him, 
was abandoned by his own soldiers and taken 
prisoner ; Monk was everywhere hailed with en- 
thusiasm, and petitions for a " free " Parliament 
came in from all parts of the country. In London 
the Rump was hastily reinstated, and while the 
army of Scotland drew near to the capital, its 
continued obstinacy roused indignation in the city. 
After some hesitation Monk, who was already in 
negotiation with Charles II., finally declared himself 



THE RESTORATION 375 

to be in favour of the Parliament desired by the 
people ; the Long Parliament dissolved itself, and 
writs were issued for a general election. Meanwhile, 
the Declaration of Breda appeared from the exiled 
king promising an amnesty, religious toleration, pay- 
ment of the army, and maintenance in possession 
of the holders of confiscated property, but qualifying 
everything by a proviso that a subsequent Parliament 
should decide all matters of dispute. This docu- 
ment was laid before the two Houses, and it 
was unanimously agreed to recall the Stuarts in 
accordance with the general wish of the country. 
About a month after the meeting of the Convention 
Parliament, Charles II. landed at Dover and entered 
his capital, amid scenes of the utmost joy (1660). 
Thus the ancient royal house came back to its own, 
and the first and last English Republic ended in the 
most complete failure. 

That failure was almost entirely due to the 
enthusiasm of the originators of the attempt. 
There was no very deep devotion in England to 
monarchical institutions until the experiment of 
doing without a king had been tried. But the 
extravagances into which the ardent Republicans 
were led by their own zeal disgusted all moderate 
men, and the measures which were proposed by 
them — as, for example, the substitution of the Ten 
Commandments for the Common Law — were alto- 
gether impracticable. It was accordingly necessary 
for Cromwell to assume a measure of authority far 
greater than that of any hereditary king, and as 
he could trust only to his army, the Republic 



376 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

degenerated into a military despotism. To this 
same extravagance was ultimately due the repeated 
failure of the Protector's efforts to rule constitu- 
tionally. The mass of the people had no sympathy 
with the cry for a "Gospel-Parliament," with the com- 
munism of one section, with the Judaism of another, 
or with the proposed fulfilment of prophecy by a 
third ; they naturally preferred Magna Charta to 
the Decalogue, and Edward I. to Moses in the 
sphere of politics, and they desired a settlement 
of the country upon mundane lines rather than an 
attempt to anticipate the Millennium. And so, 
despite the glory which surrounded Cromwell and 
the prosperity enjoyed under his rule. Englishmen 
were discontented, and it was only his personal 
genius which prevented a Restoration at a much 
earlier date. 

But although as a revolutionary movement the 
Great Rebellion failed, its work was permanent, 
and while the constitution was theoretically un- 
altered, it was practically greatly modified. Hitherto 
the possibility of an absolute monarchy had been 
always present, and it was not regarded as ex- 
traordinary that a king should occasionally dispense 
with the assistance of a representative assembly. 
But from this time the paramount influence and 
the regular meeting of Parliament were assured, 
and, while a limited degree of personal rule was 
allowed, certain matters were henceforth generally 
regarded as being altogether outside the sphere of 
royal activity. The execution of Charles I. afforded 
a salutary warning as to the results of trifling with 



RESULTS OF THE GREAT REBELLION 2)77 

the established liberties of the country, the people 
had shown conclusively that they were prepared 
to do anything rather than submit to a despotism, 
and future kings realised that any attempt to 
establish an absolute monarchy would in all 
probability lead either to deposition or to an 
appearance before another High Court of Justice. 
And consequently the Crown never pressed its 
claims if the country showed signs of rebellion ; 
even the " glorious Revolution," popular as it un- 
doubtedly was, was the work of a few determined 
men, and was only joined by the people when it had 
been already accomplished, and James 11. was deposed 
before he had succeeded in causing a general out- 
break among his subjects, before his dull mind had 
realised the immense unpopularity of his acts. 
Moreover, the Petition of Right became as much 
an integral part of the constitution as Magna Charta 
itself, the limitations which it imposed upon the 
exercise of the prerogative remained in force, and 
it was no longer possible for any king to find 
any reasonable excuse for levying taxes without 
consent of the House of Commons. In the same 
way the courts, which had been abolished by the 
Long Parliament, could not be revived, and those 
formidable engines of tyranny were relegated to 
the obscurity of the past as much as the financial 
expedients of Henry H. or the ecclesiastical jurisdic- 
tions of Becket. There was no longer any question 
of a return to absolute monarchy ; that system 
had passed away for ever, and not all the efforts 
of devoted Churchmen could persuade England 



37^ THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

that Divine Right was a right and proper theory 
or that the doctrine of No-resistance could ever 
be generally held. 

The place which the Monarchy had lost was taken 
by the Parliament, which gradually absorbed all real 
power. And that body was also profoundly influenced 
by the events of the period of rebellion. Up to the 
time of the meeting of the Long Parliament the 
authority of the two Houses was almost equal, but 
the Lords now sank into that secondary position 
which they occupy at the present day. For they 
had shared in the calamities of the king; two-thirds 
of them had joined Charles at Oxford, the remainder 
had clung to the Parliament, had been abolished 
on the proclamation of the Republic, and had 
sought to be included in the numbers of the Rump. 
The loss of prestige which these vicissitudes had 
occasioned was final, and, although nominally re- 
stored to its previous position, the Upper Chamber 
remained almost discredited, serving an useful 
purpose, indeed, in checking the extravagance of 
the Commons and in acting as a court of appeal, 
but having no longer any real initiative power or any 
ultimate authority in the state. On the other hand, 
all the events of the Great Rebellion contributed 
to exalt the Lower House. That assembly had 
conducted the civil war, had managed the affairs 
of the country for some years, and had come to 
be regarded as the true source of all authority. 
And the experience which it had thus acquired 
was bound to have a great effect upon its position 
under the restored Monarchy. It might, and 



POSITION OF PARLIAMENT 379 

actually did, lose its absolute supremacy, but no 
one could forget that it had ruled England or 
that it had treated with foreign states as a sovereign 
body. Henceforth it was to Parliament what Par- 
liament was to the whole government ; it was the 
predominant partner in the assembly of estates. 
But at the same time it could not establish a 
despotism of representatives : that attempt had 
been made and had been unsuccessful ; for the 
country had ,not resisted the tryanny of a king 
in order to make room for a worse tyranny by 
a group of oligarchs. In short, the balance of the 
Constitution had been almost reached ; the chief 
power rested with the Commons, but they had to 
admit both king and Lords to a subordinate share. 
It remained to discover the exact proportion of 
that share, and to decide how the Lower House 
should exercise its influence. 

There was another reason why it was hencefor- 
ward impossible to establish an absolute monarchy. 
To the permanence of such a system a standing 
army is essential, since it must necessarily rest 
ultimately upon violence. As has been suggested, 
the failure of the Stuarts was in a great measure 
due to the fact that they had no military force 
with which to coerce their unwilling subjects. But 
had they not alienated the affections of their people 
in other ways, they might have been able to supply 
this deficiency ; there was no particular objection 
to the existence of an army, as long as it did not 
involve the billeting of soldiers in private houses. 
After the Great Rebellion, however, the opinions 



380 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

of Englishmen upon this subject underwent a very 
great change. The iron rule of Cromwell left a 
lasting impression, and in future the existence of 
a standing army was regarded as being incompatible 
with liberty. Hardly any of James II.'s acts excited 
greater hostility than his formation of a camp at 
Hounslow, and one of the clauses of the Bill of 
Rights expressly declared it to be illegal to maintain 
a .military force without consent of Parliament. 
Even at the present day the Acts under which the 
army exists require to be renewed every year. 
And this strong antipathy to any permanent body 
of soldiers effectually prevented future kings from 
obtaining a position which might have enabled 
them to assault the Constitution with any prospect 
of success, although in any case the eventual failure 
of such an attempt was certain. 

The storm of the Great Rebellion did not leave 
the Church unscathed. It has been seen that the 
bishops had been forward in their adoption of the 
theory of Divine Right, and when the Parliament 
triumphed they paid the penalty for their unwise 
/partisanship. They were expelled from the House 
of Lords and deprived of their sees, and the lower 
clergy shared in the misfortunes of their spiritual 
fathers. Presbyterianism was established, the use of 
the Liturgy was forbidden, and, although Cromwell 
attempted to extend toleration to the Episcopalians, 
the majority of benefices passed into the hands of 
men who either disliked or were indifferent to 
government by bishops. At the Restoration the 
Church theoretically regained all her old authority, 




Photo] 



\JEmery Walker. 



ROBERT BLAKE (1599-1657). 

From an old print. 



382 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

but actually this was not at all the case. She identi- 
fied herself with the royalist party ; Charles I. was 
exalted to the position of a martyr, and was declared 
to have died for the sake of a creed which he had 
been prepared to sacrifice in Ireland, if not in 
England. The doctrine of Passive Obedience was 
preached from every Anglican pulpit, the errors of 
Cromwell were zealously exposed, and it was held 
impossible for any man to be at once a " Round- 
head " and a Churchman. But in her anxiety to 
prevent another rebellion the Church forgot to pro- 
test against the vices of the age ; smiling bishops 
paid court to a Nell Gwynne or a Castlemaine, and 
the loyal clergy would not rebuke the immoralities of 
t|ieir " religious and gracious " master, the Defender 
of the Faith. As a result the Church ceased to be 
that of the nation ; her cause was considered to be 
the same as that of the extreme Royalists and her 
spirituality was questioned. Nonconformity was 
perpetuated, and although the Anglicans had a large 
majority, the minority was powerful, and consisted of 
men so much in earnest that even the rigour of the 
Clarendon Code failed to bring them back to the 
true flock. From this time the Established Church 
had to face a formidable opposition ; her political 
creed was vigorously attacked, and the spiritual unity 
of England was a thing of the past. 

The ease with which the Restoration was ultimately 
accomplished was due to that hatred for a military 
despotism which has been already mentioned, to an 
intense longing for peace, and to a mental revolt 
against the strict morality of the Puritans. Hobbes 



CAUSES OF THE RESTORATION 383 

voiced the feelings of the majority of his countrymen 
when he lamented the unrest of his times and pro- 
tested against the anarchy of government and the 
anarchy of opinion. Men were tired of the constant 
changes in the constitution ; they longed for a 
definite settlement, and they saw no hope of this 
except in the return of the king. And in the same 
way they were satiated with religious controversy ; 
they were very weary of the endless debates between 
the countless rival sects, and, grown distrustful of all 
enthusiasm and indifferent upon all creeds, they 
longed for the old peace, when the country was 
content to leave spiritual matters to the clergy and 
when every man was not a preacher. Under the 
"godly" rule of the Rump, and the sternly moral 
government of Cromwell too, all the frailties of human 
nature were heavily punished. Vice was repressed 
by militant Virtue. But the " saints " were few and 
the " Canaanites " were many in the land ; the 
" ungodly " had a great majority, and they wished 
with one mind to be released from the oppression of 
the righteous minority. To them the Restoration 
seemed to be an escape from an awful nightmare ; 
it meant freedom to drink, freedom to eat whensoever 
they pleased ; it meant a revival of gaiety, a return 
of the good times ; and, in short, it was regarded by 
most men with the same feelings of pleasure as are 
experienced by a schoolboy at the end of term. 
They preferred the noise and bustle of "Vanity 
Fair " to the sober joys of the " Delectable Moun- 
tains " ; the excitement of the " City of Destruction " 
to the calm of the " Palace Beautiful." 



384 THE RULE OF OLIVER CROMWELL 

And the resultant reaction was as violent as it well 
could be. Some indication of the general state of 
society in each period is afforded by a comparison 
of two contemporary authors, Milton and Wycherley. 
No one could surpass the great Puritan poet in moral 
grandeur ; a deep and true Christianity pervades 
every line which he wrote, and nowhere in his works 
is there any sign of a coarse or immoral sentiment, 
while the excellence of his poetical genius places him 
in the first rank of authors, ancient and modern. 
Great is the contrast supplied by the popular 
Restoration dramatist. He can never be accused 
of believing in virtue or of attacking vic^ ; he cannot 
be accused of delicacy of expression or of artistic 
merit ; not a play that he wrote is anything but 
coarse and low-minded ; not a scene could be pro- 
duced on any modern English stage unless it were 
first altered beyond all recognition. And as the 
men were, so were the periods which they represent. 
Despite the existence of much cant and much 
hypocrisy, the England of Cromwell was a moral 
land ; it was full of men who acted up to what they 
preached, and it was a land where religion was 
respected and vice reprobated. But in the Restora- 
tion period all this was changed. An age of low 
ideals followed, in which all enthusiasm was regarded 
as unreal, when morality was considered to be ridi- 
culous, when faith was derided and piety mocked. . 
Shamefaced virtue assumed the guise of vice ; men 
did not dare to utter any noble sentiments. Patriot- 
ism died with religion ; king, Church, and people 
revelled in all the licence of a Bacchanalian feast. 
In short, the moral degradation of England under 



CONCLUSION 385 

Charles II. is almost inconceivable, while the cynical 
frankness with which men paraded their immorality 
before the public has no parallel in the annals of 
this or of any other country. Liberty had, indeed, 
been established, but it almost seemed as if it were 
at the expense of all those restraints which are 
generally operative in civilised countries, as if the 
securing of political and religious freedom entailed 
the abrogation of all moral laws. 

The Restoration may be regarded as the starting- 
point of modern English history. The great struggle 
between Crown and people ended at the return of 
Charles II. ; henceforth the problem is not whether 
Parliament is to share in the government, but whether 
any executive power at all is to be retained by the 
king. And the steps which led to this condition 
may be once more indicated. Under Edward III- 
and Richard II. the reign of feudalism came to an 
end ; in the Wars of the Roses the Baronage 
perished, and its revival was prevented by the " New 
Monarchy." By the Reformation the dangerous 
power of the Church was curtailed and another 
obstacle to liberty thus removed. Meanwhile the 
Tudors, by their foreign policy and their care for 
local government, had fostered the rise of a new 
opposition, and, finally, the last fight for absolutism 
was made by the Stuarts. Their failure secured the 
Limited Monarchy. At the close of the period the 
position of Parliament is assured, and the history of 
the next century and a half is the record of the steps 
by which the popular control of the government was 
organised and the manner in which it should be 
exercised decided. . 

26 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 



I.— The Fall of the Feudal Monarchy (1350-1399). 

A.D. 

1327-1377. Edward III. m. Philippa, daughter of the Count of 
Hainault. Twelve children : (i) Edward, the 
" Black Prince " ; (2) Lionel, Duke of Clarence, 
ancestor of the Earl of March ; (3) John of 
Gaunt, Duke of Lancaster, father of Henry IV. ; 
(4) Edmund, Duke of York, ancestor of Edward 
IV. ; (5) Thomas, Duke of Gloucester, &c. 

1377-1399. Richard II. m. (i) Anne, daughter of the Emperor 
Charles IV. ; (2) Isabella, daughter of Charles VI. 
of France. 



Contemporary Rulers. 

Emperors. 13 14. Lewis IV. (Bavaria). 1347. Charles IV. 
(Luxemburg). 
1378. Wenzel (Luxemburg). 
1322. Charles IV. (Capet). 1328. Phihp VI. 

(Valois). 
1350. John II. 1364. Charles V. 1380. Charles VI. 
Scotland. 1306. Robert I. (Bruce). 1329. David II. 1370. 
Robert II. (Stuart). ^ 1390. Robert III. 



France. 



1331-1336. Edward III. encourages the immigration of 
Flemish weavers. 
1333' War with Scotland ; battle of Halidon Hill. 
1337. Beginning of the Hundred Years' War. 

386 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 387 

A.D. 

1340. Battle of Sluys. Disputed succession in Brittany. 

First audit of accounts by the Commons. 
1346. Battles of Cregy and Neville's Cross. Siege of 
Calais, which capitulated in 1347. 
1349-1350. The Black Death. First Statute of Labourers. 
1351. Statute of Provisors. 

1353. Appropriation of supplies. Royal ordinances to 
be entered on the Rolls of Parliament. 

1355. Black Prince ravages Southern France. The 

" Burnt Candlemas." 

1356. Battle of Poitiers. Rebellion of the " Jacquerie." 
1360. Treaty of Bretigni. Wycliff at Oxford. 

1362. Langland's "Vision of Piers Plowman," first 

appears ; completed in 1380. 

1363. Edward abandons tax on wool. 

1367. Battle of Navarette ; heavy taxation leads to revolt 

of Aquitaine. 

1368. Wycliff' s De Dominio civili. 
1370. Sack of Limoges. 

1372. Battle off Rochelle. 
1374. Loss of Aquitaine completed, 

1376. The " Good Parliament." Impeachment of the 
adherents of John of Gaunt. 
. 1377. Trial of Wycliff. End of the " Babylonish Cap- 
tivity" of the Popes; next year, the "Great 
Schism" begins. 
1377-1385. Ascendancy of Lancaster. 

1380. Poll Tax. 

1381. The Peasants' Revolt. 

1384. Death of Wycliff. His Bible was probably com- 
pleted in 1383. 
1385-1390. Ascendancy of Gloucester ; during the absence of 
John of Gaunt in Spain. 

1386. Impeachment of Michael de la Pole. Commission 

of regency. 

1387. The Lords Appellant. 
13QO-1399. Richard's personal government. 

1392. Statute of Pnvmituire. 

1397. Condemnation of Haxey. Death of Gloucester. 



388 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 



A.D. 



1398. 



Banishment of Hereford and Norfolk. Hereford 
returns next year and. deposes Richard. 



n. — The Constitutional Experiment (1399-1-461). 

1399-1413. Henry IV. m. (i) Mary, daughter of Humphrey de 
Bohun, Earl of Hereford, and (2) Joan, daughter 
of the King of Navarre and Duchess Dowager 
of Brittany. By his first wife : (i) Henry V. ; 
(2) Thomas, Duke of Clarence ; (3) John, of 
Bedford; (4) Humphrey, Duke of Gloucester; 
(5) Blanche, m. Lewis, son of the Emperor 
Rupert ; (6) Philippa, m. Eric, King of Denmark. 

1413-1422. Henry V. m. Catherine, daughter of Charles VI. of 
France. One son, Henry VI. Catherine m. (2) 
Owen Tudor, grandfather of Henry VII. 

1422-146 1. Henry VI. m.. Margaret, daughter of Rene, Titular 
King of Jerusalem, &c,, Duke of Anjou, &c. 
One son, Edward, Prince of Wales. 

Contemporary Rulers. 

Emperors. 1378. Wenzel (Luxemburg). 1400. Rupert (Palati- 
nate). 
1410. Sigismund (Luxemburg). 1438. Albert II. 

(Austria). 
1440. Frederic III. (Austria). 
France. 1380. Charles VI. 1422. Charles VII. 
Scotland, 1390. Robert III. 1405. James I. 1436. James II. 
1460. James HI. 



1399- 



1400. 
1401. 

1402. 
1403. 



Condemnation of Haxey reversed. The Commons 
thus establish their privilege of freedom of 
speech. 

Rebellion of the Earls crushed. 

Owen Glendower rebels in Wales. Statute De 
Heretico Comhurrendo. 

Battle of Homildon Hill. 

Rebellion of the Percies ; battle of Shrewsbury. 



1404. The " Unlearned Parliament." 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 389 

A.D. 

1405. Archbishop Scrope executed. 

1406. Petition of Thirty-One Articles. 

1407. Murder of the Duke of Orleans ; civil war in France. 

1414. Council of Constance ends the " Great Schism." 

1415. Conspiracy of Cambridge. Capture of Harfleur. 

Battle of Agincourt. 
1419. Henry V. takes Rouen. Assassination of the Duke 

of Burgundy. 
J420. Treaty of Troyes. 
1422-1435. Bedford's government. 

14*24. Battle of Verneuil. Gloucester's expedition to 

Flanders. 

1428. Siege of Orleans. Battle of the Herrings. 

1429. Joan of Arc raises the siege. 

1430. Forty- shilling franchise established. 
]435. Congress of Arras. Death of Bedford. 

1445. Treaty of Tours ; marriage of Henry VI. to 

Margaret of Anjou. 
1447. Death of Gloucester. Rivalry of York with 

Somerset, and William de la Pole, Duke of 

Suffolk. 
1450. Battle of Formigny ; followed by loss of Northern 

France. 
1450. Impeachmeiit and death of Suffolk. Cade's 

Rebellion. 
1453. Battle of Castillon ; loss of Southern France, 

Capture of Constantinople by Mahomet II. 
1454-1455. First regency of York. 

1455. Battle of St. Albans. 
1456-1457. Second regency of York. 

1459. Battle of Bloreheath. 

1460. Battle of Northampton. York claims the throne. 

Battle of Wakefield. 

1461. Battle of Mortimer's Cross, St Albans, and Towton. 

Deposition of Henry VI. 

III. — The House of York (1461-1485). 
1461-1483. Edward IV. m. Elizabeth, daughter of Richard 
Woodville, Lord Rivers ; and widow of Sir 



390 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 



A.D. 

John Grey. Children : (i) Edward V. ; (2) 
Richard, Duke of York ; (3) EHzabeth, m. 
Henry VII., &c. 
1483. Edward V. 
1483-1485. Richard III., m. Anne, daughter of Richard 
Neville, Earl of Warwick, and widow of 
Edward, son of Henry VI. One son, Edward, 
Prince of Wales. 

Contemporary Rulers. 



Emperors. 


1440. 


Frederic III. 


France. 


1442. 


Charles VII. 1461. Louis XI. 




1483. 


Charles VII. 


Scotland. 


1460. 


James III. 


Spain. 


1479. 


Ferdinand (of Aragon) marries Isabella 
(of Castille) ; they rule Spain jointly. 



1464. Battles of Hedgeley Moor and Hexham. Judge 

Fortescue writes his De Laitdibus Legum Anglice. 

1465. Marriage of Edward IV. 

1466. Alliance with Burgundy. 

1470. Flight and return of Warwick; temporary restora- 

tion of Henry VI. 

147 1. Battles of Barnet and Tewkesbury. 

1475. Treaty of Pecquigny. 

1476. Introduction of Printing. 

1477. Marriage of Mary of Burgundy to Maximilian. 
1483. Benevolences declared to be illegal. Bucking- 
ham's rebellion. 

1485. Battle of Bosworth. 

IV. — The Tudor Monarchy (1485-1529). 

1485-1509. Henry VII. m. Elizabeth, daughter of Edward IV. 
Children: (i) Arthur, Prince of Wales; (2) 
Henry VIII. ; (3) Margaret, m. (i.) James IV. of 
Scotland, and (ii.) Earl of Angus ; (4) Mary, m. 
(i.) Louis XII. of France, and (li.) Charles 
Brandon, Duke of Suffolk. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 39 1 

A.D. 
1509-1547. Henry VIII. m. (i.) Katherine, daughter of 
Ferdinand and Isabella, one daughter, Mary ; 
(ii.) Anne, daughter of Sir Thomas Boleyn, one 
daughter, Elizabeth ; (iii.) Jane, daughter of Sir 
John Seymour, one son, Edward VI. ; (iv.) Anne, 
sister of William, Duke of Cleves ; (v.) Catherine, 
daughter of Lord Edmund Howard ; (vi.) 
Catherine, daughter of Sir Thomas Parr and 
widow of Lord Latimer. 

Contemporary Rulers. 

Emperors. 1440. Frederic III. 1493. Maximilian I. 

15 19. Charles V. (King of Spain). 
France. 1483. Charles VIII. 1498. Louis XII. 

15 15, Francis I. 

Scotland. 1460, James III. 1488. James IV. 1513. James V. 

Spain. 1479- Ferdinand and Isabella. 1504. Ferdinand 

(Aragon). Philip I. and Joanna (Castile). 

1516. Charles I. (Emperor Charles V.). 



J487. Court founded for the trial of great nobles; the 
subsequent Star Chamber. 

1487. Lambert Simmel's rebellion : Battle of Stoke. 

1488. Death of Francis of Brittany. Rising in Northern 

England caused by heavy taxation. 

1491. Perkin Warbeck appears. Anne of Brittany 

marries Charles VIII. 

1492. Columbus discovers America. The htiercursus 

Magnus. 

1493. Philip of Burgundy marries Joanna of Spain. 

Treaty . of Etaples. 

1494. Charles VIII. invades Italy. The "Holy League" 

formed against the French. 

1495. Poynings' laws. Statute declaring it lawful to 

serve the "de facto king." 

1496. Perkin Warbeck in Scotland. 

1497. Cornish rising. Battle of Blackheath. Capture 



392 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 

A.D. 

of Warbeck. Sebastian Cabot lands in America. 
Vasco da Gama rounds the Cape of Good Hope. 
1499. Warbeck executed. Colet lectures on Greek at 
Oxford. 

1501. Katherine of Aragon m. Arthur, who dies next 

year. 

1502. Margaret Tudor m. James IV. of Scotland. 

1503. Death of Elizabeth of York. 

1504. IntercursiLS mains. 
1508. League of Cambray. 

151 1. Holy League against Louis XH. 

15 13. Battles of Guinegate and Flodden. Wolsey chief 

Minister. 

1514. Incorporation of Trinity House, Deptford. 

1515. Sir Thomas More's ''Utopia." 
15 1 7. Martin Luther at Wittenberg 

1520. Alliance of England with Charles V. War with 

Francis I. 

1521. Henry writes his tract against Luther. 

1523. The Commons refuse Wolsey's demand for a 

subsidy. 
1525. The Battle of Pavia. 

1527. Sack of Rome by Charles V. 

1528. Trial of Katherine before Wolsey and Campeggio. 

Fall of Wolsey. 

v.— The Reformation (1529-1558). 

1559-1547. Henry VIII. (see above). 

1547-1553- Edward VI. 

1 553- 1 558. Mary I. m» Philip II., King of Spain; 

Contemporary Rulers. 



Emperors. 


1519- 


Charles V. 


1558. 


Ferdinand I. 


France. 


1515- 


Francis I. 


1547- 


Henry II. 


Scotland. 


1513- 


James V. 


1542. 


Mary. 


Spain. 


1516. 


Charles I. 


1556. 


Philip II. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 393 

A.D. 
1529- 1536. The Reformation Parliament. 

1530. The nation pardoned by Act of ParHament for 

having admitted Wolsey's legatine authority. 

1531. First-fruits, &c., taken from the Pope. 

1532. Regulation of appeals to Rome. 

1533. Cranmer declares the marriage with Katherme 

invalid. Act of Submission of the clergy. 

1534. First Succession Act. Act of Supremacy. The 

Nun of Kent executed. 

1535. Dissolution of the smaller monasteries. Statute 

of Uses. Execution of More and Fisher. 

1536. Irish Rebellion. Execution of Anne Boleyn. 

Pilgrimage of Grace. The " Ten Articles." 

1538. The Bible issued in English by royal authority. 

1539. The Six Articles. 

• 1540. Dissolution of the larger monasteries. Execution 
of Thomas Cromwell. Act giving Royal Pro- 
clamations the force of law. 

1542. Battle of Solway Moss. Henry takes the title of 

" King " of Ireland. 

1543. Wales fully incorporated with England. 

1544. Capture of Boulogne. 

1546. Peace with France. Beginning of the Smalkaldic 

War (1546-1552). 
1547-1549. Protectorate of Somerset. 

1547. Battle of Pinkie. 

1548. Act of Uniformity. First Prayer Book of 

Edward VI. 

1549. Risings in the West and East. Fall of Somerset. 

Government of Warwick (Northumberland). 
1550 Sale of Boulogne. 

1552. Execution of Somerset. Second Prayer Book of 

Edward VI. The Forty-two Articles. 

1553. Proclamation of Lady Jane Grey as Queen. 

Defeat and execution of Northumberland. 

1554. Sir Thomas Wyatt's rebellion. Execution of Lady 

Jane Grey. Mary marries Philip. Reunion 
with Rome. 



394 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 

A.D. 

1555-1558. The Marian Persecution. 

1557. Battle of St. Quentin. Loss of Calais. 

VI. — The Elizabethan Settlement (1558-1588). 
1558-1603. Elizabeth. 





Contemporary Rulers. 


Emperors. 


1558. Ferdinand I. 1564. Maximihan II. 




1576. Rudolf II. 


France. 


1547. Henry VI. 1559. Francis II. 




1560. Charles IX. 1574. Henry III. 


Scotland. 


1542. Mary. 1567. James VI. 


Spain. 


1556. Philip II. 



1559. Acts of Supremacy and Uniformity. 

1560. The Lords of the Congregation triumph in Scot- 

land. Beginning of the "Wars of Religion " in 
France. 

1562. First persecuting statute of Elizabeth. 

1563. Act of Apprentices. The Thirty-nine Articles 

published. 
1563-1582. Immigration of Protestant refugees from France 
and the Low Countries. 

1566. Foundation of the Royal Exchange. 

1567. Murder of Darnley. Battle of Carberry Hill. 

1568. Battle of Langside. Mary takes refuge in Eng- 

land. The rebellion of the United Provinces 
begins. 

1569. Plot of Norfolk in favour of Mary. 

1570. Publication of the Bull of Deposition. 

1 57 1. The Thirty-nine Articles made binding on the 

clergy. The Ridolfi Plot. Battle of Lepanto. 

1572. Massacre of St. Bartholomew. 

1576. Attempted colonisation of Labrador. 

1577. Drake's vo5^age to the Pacific. 

1580. Revolt in Ireland organised by the Jesuits. Esme 

Stuart in Scotland. 

1 58 1. Foundation of the Turkey Company. 



Emperors. 


1576. 


Rudolf II. 


France. 


1574- 


Henry III 


Scotland. 


1567. 


James VI. 


Spain. 


1556. 


Philip II. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 395 

A.D. 

1583. Court of High Commission established. The 

ex officio oath. Throgmorton's Plot. 

1584. Murder of William the Silent. " Bond of Asso- 

ciation." Attempted colonisation of Virginia. 

1585. Acts against the Jesuits. 

1586. Battle of Ziitphen. Babington's conspiracy. 

1587. Execution of Mary, Queen of Scots. 

VII. — The Struggle with Spain (1588-1603). 
1558-1603. Elizabeth. 

Contemporary Rulers. 



1589. Henry IV. (Bourbon). 
1598. Philip III. 



1587. Drake burns the Spanish Fleet at Cadiz. 

1588. The Armada. " Martin Marprelate Tracts.'" Mr. 

Cope's " Bill and Book." 
1590. Spenser's "Faerie Queene." ' 

1593. Persecution of the Puritans. 
1593-1608. Shakespeare^ Plays. 

1594. Hooker's " Ecclesiastical Polity." 
1596. Attack on Cadiz. 

1598. Death of Burleigh. Rebellion in Ireland. 

1600. East India Company founded. 

1601. Monopolies successfully resisted. The Poor Law. 

Execution of Essex. 

VIII. — The Theory of Divine Right (1603-1640). 

1603-1625. James I. m. Anne, daughter of Frederic II., King 
of Denmark. Children : (i) Henry, Prince of 
Wales ; (2) Charles I. ; (3) Elizabeth, m. 
Frederic, Elector Palatine of the Rhine. 

1625-1649. Charles I. m. Henrietta Maria, daughter of 
Henry IV., King of France. Children : (i 



396 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 



A.D 



Charles II. ; (2) James II. ; (3) Mary, m. 
William, Statholder of the Netherlands, and 
lour other children. 



Contemporary Rulers. 



Emperors. 

France. 
Spain. 



1576. Rudolf II. 

nand II. 

1589. Henry IV. 

1598. Philip III. 



1612. Matthias. 1619. Ferdi- 
1637. Ferdinand III. 
1610. Louis XIII. 
1621. Philip IV. 



1603. 
1604. 
1605. 
1606. 
1607. 
1609. 
1610. 
1612. 
1613. 
1614. 
1616. 

1618. 

1620. 
162 1. 



1623. 
1624. 

1625. 
1626. 
1627. 
1628. 
1629. 



The Millenary Petition. Main and Bye Plots. 

Hampton Cou,rt Conference. 

Gunpowder Plot. 

Bates' Case. 

Virginia finally settled. 

The " Great Contract." 

Plantation of Ulster. 

Death of Robert Cecil. 

Elizabeth m. the Elector Palatine. 

James' second Parliament dissolved. 

Fall of Somerset ; rise of Buckingham. The case 

of " Commendams." 
Beginning of the Thirty Years' War. Execution 



of Raleigh. 



The Pilgrim Fathers land in New England. 
Revival of Impeachment. Bacon fined. 



The 



" Novum Organon." " Protestation " of the 

Commons. 
Colonisation of New Hampshire. 
War with Spain after the breaking off of the 

proposed marriage alliance. 
Futile attempt on Cadiz. 
Impeachment of Buckingham. 
War with France. Darnel's Case. 
Petition of Right. Murder of Birmingham. 
The Three Resolutions. Dissolution of the third 

Parliament. 



CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 397 

A.D. 

1629-1640. Personal government of Charles. 

1633. Laud made Archbishop, Wentworth in Ireland. 

Colonisation of Connecticut and Maryland. 

1634. Ship Money first raised. 

1636. Colonisation Of Rhode Island. Plantation of Con- 

naught, 

1637. Prosecution of Prynne, Trial of Hampden. 

1638. The Scotch resist the introduction of the Prayer 

Book. They take the Covenant. 

1639. Charles forced to give way to the Scotch. 

1640. "Short" Parliament, Renewed war with the 

Scotch. Meeting of the Long Parliament. 

IX. — The Great Rebellion (1640-1649). 
1625-1649. Charles I, (see above). 

Contemporary Rulers. 

Emperors, 1637. Ferdinand III, 

France. 1610. Louis XIII, 1643. Louis XIV. 

Spain. 1621, Philip IV. 



1641. Execution of Strafford. Abolition of the Courts of 

Star Chamber, &c. Triennial Act. Act de- 
claring that Parliament should be dissolved 
only with its own consent. " The Incident." 
Irish Rebellion, Grand Remonstrance, 

1642. Impeachment of and attempt to arrest the Five 

Members. MiHtia Bill. Battle of Edgehill. 

1643. Siege of Gloucester. Parliament takes the 

Covenant, First Battle of Newbury, 

1644. Marston Moor. Second Battle of Newbury. 

Parliamentary Army capitulates at Lostwithiel, 

1645. New Model Army formed. Self-denying Ordinance. 

Battles of Naseby and Philiphaugh. 

1646. Charles surrenders to the Scots. 

1647. The Army gets possession of Charles. 

1648. The " Second" Civil War. " Pride s Purge." 

1649. Trial and Execution of Charles, 



398 CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE 

A.D. 

X, — The Rule of Oliver Cromwell. 

1649-1653. The Commonwealth. 
1653-1658. Ohver Cromwell, Protector. 
1658-1659. Richard Cromwell, Protector. 
1659-1660. The Commonwealth (restored). 

Contemporary Rulers. 

Emperors. 1637. Ferdinand III. 1658. Leopold I. 
France. 1643. Louis XIV. 
Spain. 1621. Philip IV. 



1649. Cromwell takes Drogheda. 

1650. Battle of Dunbar. 

1651. Battle of Worcester. Navigation Laws. Hobbes' 

" Leviathan." 

1652. Dutch War. 

1653. Expulsion of the Rump, The Nominee Parlia- 

ment. Instrument of Government. 

1654. Peace with Holland. Cromwell's second Parlia- 

ment. 

1655. The Major-Generals. Conquest of Jamaica. 

1656. Cromwell's third Parliament. 

1657. The " Humble Petition and Advice." 

1658. Capture of Dunkirk. Death of Oliver Cromwell. 

1659. Resignation of Richard Cromwell. Restoration 

of the Rump. 

1660. Monk marches on London. Meeting of the Con- 

vention Parliament. Return of Charles II. 



INDEX 



Acts of Parliament-^— 

Against dissolution, 328 

Royal Succession, 187 

Submission of Clergy, 187 

Supremacy, 187, 189, 231, 234 

Triennial, 327, 328 

Uniformity, 215 
" Addled " Parliament, the, 293 
" Agitators," the, 338 
" Agreement of the People," the, 

361 
Albany, dukes of, 75, 107, 158 
Alencon, Duke of, 223, 224, 262 
American colonies, 274-278^, 320- 

321 
Angus, earls of, 75, 158 
Anne Boleyn, 162, 164, 183, 192, 

260 
Anne of Brittany, 144, 145 
Anne of Burgundy, 85, 87 
Anne of Cleves, 193 
Aquitaine, 13, 17, 28, 34, 38, 40 
Arabella Stuart, 290 
Armada, the, 248-252 
Armagnacs, the, 80, 82 
Arminius, 319 
Arran, Earl of, 219, 262 
Arras, Congress of, 87 
Artevelde, James van, 14, 20, 25, 

26 
Arthur, Prince, 145, 150 
Arundels, the, 44, 45, loi 
"Association," the, 334, 336 



' ' Association of Christian 

Brothers," 174 

B 

Babington's conspiracy, 226 

" Babylonish Captivity," the, 20, 

62 
Bacon, Sir Francis, 244, 295 
Ball, John, 66 
Balliol, Edward, 8, 15 
Balliol College, 64 
" Barebones " Parliament, 362 
Baronage, the, 3,4; decline of, 

57-59; changes in, 59, 114, 

122; extinction of, 96; 114, 

211 
Bates, case of, 293 
Battles— 

Agincourt, 81 

Auberoche, 26 

Barnet, 105 

Beauge, 84 

Blackheath, 133 

Bloreheath, 92 

Bosworth, III 

Carberry Hill, 220 

Castillon, 88 

Crecy, 21, 26, 27 

Dunbar, 360 

Edgehill, 334 

Flodden, 158 

Formigny, 88 

Gravelines, 253 

Guinegate, 157 



399 



400 



INDEX 



Battles {continiied) — 

Halidon Hill, 8 

Hedgeley Moor, lOO 

Hexham, loo 

Homildon Hill, 75 

Langside, 220 

Lostwithiel, 336 

Marignano, 158 

Marston Moor, 335 

Meaux, 32 

Mortimer's Cross, 93 

Naseby, 337 

Navarette, 37, 57 

Neville's Cross, 8, 29 

Newbury, 335, 336 

North Foreland, 368 

Northampton 92, 102, 114 

No vara, 154 

Pavia, 161 

Philiphaugh, 337 

Pinkie, 198 

Poitiers, 30, 31. 57 

Portland, 'j'] 

Preston, 339 

Rochelle, 40 

Rouvray, 86 

St. Albans, 92, 93 

St. Aubin, 144 

St. Cloud, 78 

St. Quentin, 206 

Shrewsbury, 76 

Sluys, 25 

Solway Moss, 194 

Stoke, 129 

Tewkesbury, 105 

Towton, 93' 

Turnham Green, 334 

Verneuil, 85 

Wakefield, 93 

Worcester, 360 

Zutphen, 226 
Beaufort, Cardinal, ^6, 88, 89 
Bedford, Duke of, 85-88 
Benefit of Clergy, curtailed, 137 
Benevolences, 114, 137 
Berwick, 29, 30, 107 
Bible, the, WycHff's, 65, 193 ; 

Authorised Verson, 287 
Black Death, 27, 28 ; effects of, 68 
Black Prince, the, 12, 29-31, 37- 

42 



Blake, 368, 369 

" Bond of Association," the, 

225, 228 
" Book of Rates," the, 293 
Bordeaux, 13, 29, 37, 40 
Boulogne, 146, 194, 198 
Bristol, 337 
Brittany, 25, 36, 39, 43, 85, 144, 

145 
Buckingham, dukes of — 

Stafifords, 107, no, 128, 170 

George Villiers, 288, 298, 300, 
302-304, 306 
Buckhurst, 242 
Burgundy, 34, 78-84, 106, 7, 

142, 148 
Burgundy, dukes of, 80-84, 84- 

88, 104 
Burleigh, Lord {see Cecil, 

William). 
Burton, 244 
Bye Plot, 286 

C 

Cabot, 238 

Cade's rebellion, 90 

Cadiz, 249, 255, 298 

Calais, 27, 29, 34, 40, 45, 81, 88, 

92, loi, 206 
Calvinism, 201, 232, 264, 265, 

319 . 
Cambridge, Earl of, 80 
Camden, 244 
Campeggio, 164 
Campion, 225 
Cardinal's College, 176 
Carlisle, 75 
Carr, Robert, 288 
"Casket Letters," the, 221 
Castik, 37, 44, ']^, 143 
Catherine of France, 80, 84 
Catherine Howard, 193 
Catherine Swynford, 125 
Catholics, the, 192, 214-216, 2 igff, 

232-236, 241, 246, 248, 264, 

286, 287 
Caxton, 119 
Cecil, Robert, 252, 259, 260, 286, 

288, 290, 293 
Cecil, William (Burleigh), 216, 
21S, 223, 230, 259, 370 



INDEX 



401 



Cerdagne, 145, 146 

Charles I., 290, 296-320, 326- 

345 
Charles II, i, 2, 358, 359, 360, 

374, 375» 385- 
Charles V., Emperor, 150, 151, 

158-162, 178, 192, 194 
Charles V. of France, 32-40, 43 
Charles VI. of France, 45, 75, 77- 

80, 84 
Charles VII. of France, 82-87 
Charles VIII. of France, iii, 

130, 143-148, 154 
Charles the Bad. 14, 28, 32 
Charles of Blois, 25 
Charles the Rash, 104-107, 142 
Chaucer, 64 

Church, the, condition of, 62-66, 
97; decline of, 115, 171-175 ; 
effect of Reformation on, 211, 
231-236; position of, 264, 265, 
287, 292-296, 319, 320, 365, 
380-382 
Clarence, dukes of, 78, 84, 104- 

106 
Clement VII., 162, 164, 183, 184 
Coke, Sir Edward, 294 
Colchester, 339 
Colepepper, 329 
Colet, 172 
Columbus, 159, 178 
Commendams, case of, 294 
Commons, the, separation from 
the Lords, 49 ; position of, 
under Edward III. and 
Richard II., 50-59 ; under the 
Lancastrians, "93-96 ; under the 
Yorkists, 1 1 3-1 14; under the 
Tudors, 170-171, 212,266-268, 
278-282 ; under the Stuarts, 
287, 297-302, 324-331, 338; 
under the Protectorate 362- 
365, 377-380 
Connaught, plantation of, 314 
Convention Parliament, the, 375 
Cope's " Bill and Book," 267 
Cornwall, risings in, 133, 134 
Council, the Royal, 43, 85, 95, 

108, 141 
Cranmer, Thomas, 184, 200, 201, 
205, 208 



Cromwell, Henry, 367 
Cromwell, Oliver, 334-339, 350, 

351, 353, 356-373, 375, 380, 

383 
Cromwell, Richard, 373, 374 
Cromwell, Thomas, 184, 187, 

189, 190, 193, 208 

D 

D'Albret, Sieur, 145 

Darnel's case, 300 

Darnley, Lord, 219, 220 

David, King of Scotland, 8, 30 

De la Mare, 54 

De la Poles, 44, 88, 90, 129, 134, 

151, 192 
De Vere, 44 
" Declaration," the, 338 
" Declaration of Breda," the, 375 
Desmond's rebellion, 224 
Drake, Sir Francis, 239, 240, 248, 

249, 252, 277 
Drogheda, 358 
Dublin, 129, 138, 140 
Dudley, Robert, 168 
Dudley (Earl of Leicester), 218, 

231,254, 259, 262 
Dunkirk, 369 



E 

East India Company, 268 
Edinburgh, 194, 315, 360 
Edward I., 8, 18, 48, 54 
Edward III., I, 2, 6-39, 42, 47- 

61, 79, 118, 136, 160, 180 
Edward IV., 93, 100-107, II2- 

127, 142, 168, 169, 177 
Edward V., 107, 128 
Edward VI., 196-202 
Eliot, 309, 353 

Elizabeth, 207, 214-282, 284, 316 
Elizabeth Woodville, 102 
Elizabeth of York, 106, no, 124, 

126, 150 
Empire, the, 31, 77, 142, 160, 

174 
Empson, 168 
Erasmus, 172 
Essex, 259-260 



27 



402 



INDEX 



Fairfax, 334, 335, 337-340, 353. 

356 
Falkland, 329 
Ferdinand of Spain, 134, 143, 

146, 148, 150, 154, 156, 158 
Feudalism, 2-5, 70 
'' Field of Cloth of Gold," 160 
Fisher, 189 
Five Articles, the, 315 
Five Members, the, 330, 331 
Flanders, 10, 13, 14, 20, 24-26, 
80, 105, 116, 148, 151, 160, 178 
" Form of Apology," the, 292 
Forty-two Articles, the, 201 
France, 10-21, 24-40, 45, 59, 75, 
77-88, 105-107, III, 131, 142, 
144-147, I 56-161, 193, 206, 
214, 220, 222, 223, 246, 256, 

289, 30O' 369. 370 
Francis I. of France, 1 58-1 61, 

194 
Francis II. of France, 198, 216, 

219 
Francis II. of Brittany, 144 
Frederic, Elector Palatine, 290, 

292 
Free Companies, the, 32, 36 
Frobisher, 252, 274 



Gardiner, 201, 202 

Genoese, 22, 118, 180 

Germany, 18, 20, 159, 164, 177 

Gilbert, 274 

Glendower, Owen, 75, "]"] 

Gloucester, dukes of — 

Thomas, 44, 45 

Humphrey, 85-89 
Gloucester, siege of, 335 
Good Parliament, the, 42, 53-56 
Gosnold, Bartholemew, 277 
Grand Remonstrance, the, 329 
Great Contract, the, 293 
Greene, 242 

Grenville, Sir Richard, 259, 276 
Gresham, Sir Thomas, 270 
Grocyn, 171 

Guienne, 10-13, i7j 18, 26, 29, 
38, 45, 77, 78, 88 



Guises, the, 216, 218, 246, 254 
Gunpowder Plot, 287 

H 

Hakluyt, 244 

Hamilton, 328 

Hampden, John, 312, 313, 330, 

353 
Hampton Court Conference, 287 
Harfleur, siege of, 81 
Haselrig, 330 
Hawkins, Sir John, 239, 240, 252, 

261 
Haxey, Sir Thomas, 94 
Henry II., 13, 17, 18, 32, 35 
Henry IV., 44, 46, 72-78, 89-05 
Henry V., 78-85, 99, 106 
Henry VI., 84, 87, 88-95, 100- 

108, 112 
Henry VII., 105, 110-112, 116, 

122-151, 166-171, 177-181 
Henry VIII., 150, 152-165, 171, 

174, 175, 180, 183 
Henry II. of France, 216 
Henry HI. of France, 226, 256 
Henry IV. of France, 255, 256 
Henry of Trastamara, 37 
High Commission, Court of, 265, 

278, 293, 327 
Hispaniola, 369 
Hobbes, 382 
Holies, 330 

Homilies, Book of, 201 
Hooker, 244 
Hooper, 201, 205 
Hopion, Sir Ralph, 334 
Huguenots, 220-224, 239, 255, 

256, 271 
Hull, 331 

Humble Petition and Advice, 356 
Hundred Years' War, causes of, 

10-14 > characters of, 14-24 : 

effects of, 67 
Huntingdon's rebellion, 73, 74 
Hyde, 329 



Impeachment, 52, 64 ; revival of, 

295 
Impositions, 293 



INDEX 



403 



Independents, 337, 339, 340, 365 
"Incident," the, 328 
Instrument of Government, 364 
Ireland, 45, 46, 90, 92, 126, 129, 
132, 138-141, 190, 224, 259, 

313' 329. 356-359, 367 
Ireton, 359 

Isabella, the Catholic, 143, 151 
Isabella, wife of Edward II., 7, 14 
Isabella of France, wife of Richard 

II., 45, 77 
Italy, 97, 142, 156 

J 
Jacqueline of Hainault, 86 
Jacquerie, the, 32 
Jacquetta of Luxemburg, 87 
Jamaica, 369 

James I. of Scotland, 77, 85 
James III. of Scotland, 107, 147 
James IV. of Scotland, 132, 147, 

James V. of Scotland, 158 
James I. (VI. of Scotland), 221, 

260, 282-296, 315, 316 
Jane Grey, Lady, 157 
Jane Seymour, 193, 195 
Jesuits, the, 224, 225, 234 
Joan of Arc, 87 
Joanna of Spain, 150, 151 
John III. of Brittany, 25 
John of France, 28, 30,-31, 32, 

34, 35, 80 
John of Gaunt, 40, 42, 43, 45, 46, 

53, 54, 55, 56, 60, 65, 125 
Jones, Colonel, 356 
Jonson, Ben, 244 
Juliers, 20 

Julius II., Pope, 154, 162 
• Justices of the Peace, 274 

K 

Katherine of Spain, 150, 162, 164, 

187, 192 
Katherine Gordon, Lady, 132 
Kent, risings in, 90 
Kent, Earl of, 73 
Ket's rebellion, 200 
Kildare, Earl of, 127, 129, 140, 

141 



" Killing no murder," 365 
Knox, John, 218, 228 



Lambert Simuel, 126, 128, 129, 

140 
Lambert, 374 
Lancastrians, 42, 54, 55, 71, 89, 

92, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 105, 

no. III, 113, 125, 127, 140, 

169 
Langland, 64 

Latimer, Hugh, 201, 205, 210 
Latimer, Lord, 55 
Laud, Archbishop, 304-305, 309, 

314, 348 
League, the, of Edward III., 20, 

21 
Learning, revival of, 98, 120, 143, 

171, 172 
Leicester, 165, (Earl of, see Dudley) 
Leith, 75 
LeoX., 175 
Leslie, Alexander, 315 
Levant, 178 
Levellers, 355 
Leven, Lord, 360 
Lewis IV., 20 
Limoges, 12, 39, 40 
Linacre, 172 

Lincolnshire, rising in, 104 
Liveries, 137, 168 
Lollards, 65, 97, 98 
London, 42, 74, 90, 92, 105, 124, 

126, 129, 133, 151, 165 
Londonderry, 358 
Long Parliament, 316, 324, 362, 

375 
Lords, House of, 49, 50, 53, 76, 

361, 378 
Lords, Appellant, 44, 45, 89 
Lords of the Congregation, 218, 

219 
" Lords Ordainers," 48 
Lewis VII., 17, 35 
Lewis X., 14 
Lewis XL, 102, 104, 106, 107, 

118, 142, 143 
Lewis XII., 144, 154, 157, 158 
Lovel, no, 128, 129 



404 



INDEX 



Low Countries, 20, 127, 159 
Luther, 174, 175, 183 
Lutherans, 186 
Lutterworth, 65 
Lyons, 148 
Lyons, Richard, 55 

M 
Main Plot, 286 
Maine, 16, 17, 34, 80 
Maintenance, 98, 136, 168 
Major-Generals, 364, 374 
Manchester, Earl of, 334, 337 
March, Earl of, 44, 55, 72, 80 
Mardyke, 369 
Margaret of Burgundy, 104, 127, 

128, 130 
Margaret of Savoy, 151 
Margaret Tudor, 147, 158 
Mario w, 244 
" Martin Marprelate Tracts," the, 

264 
Martyn, Sir H., 301 ' 
Mary (Queen), 162, 200, 202-207 
Mary (d. of H. VII), 157, 200 
Mary de Bohun, 60 
Mary of Burgundy, 107, 142 
Mary, Queen of Scots, 194, 215-228 
Maximilian, 130, 142, 145, 146, 

148, 156, 158 
Maynooth, 140 
Medina Sidonia, 249, 252-254 
Mercantile system, 177 
Merchant taylors, 177 
" Merciless " Parliament, 44 
Milan, 142, 148, 154, 158 
Milford Haven, iii 
Militia Bill, 331 
Millenary Petition, 286 
Milton, 384 

"Model" Parliament, 48 
Mompesson, Sir Giles, 295 
Monarchy, the, 2, 4-6, 10, 70, 96, 

278 ff., 378 fif. 
Monk, 374 

Montague, Lord, 100, lOI 
Montfort, Earl of, 25, 26, 29, 39 
Montrose, 337 
Moray, Lord, 219, 221, 222 
Morei SirT., 172, 174, 175, 183, 

189 



Mortimers, the, 7, 8 

Morton, Cardinal, 108, no, 138, 

168 
Mowbray, 76 

N 

Naples, 142, 148, 154, 156, 159 

Navigation Laws, 177 

Navy, the, 58, 59, 180, 181, 249, 

250, 3" 
"Necessary Doctrine and Eru- 
dition of a Christian Man", 193 
Nevill, Lord, 55 
" New Model " Parliament, 364 
Newcastle, Marquis of, 334, 335 
Nonconformity, 3, 265, 384 
Norfolk, dukes of, 193, 194 ; 222, 

223 
Normandy, 16, 17, 18, 22, 34, 35, 

80, 106 
Northumberland, Earl of, 76. ']'] 
Northumberland, Duke of (Dud- 
ley), 199-202 
Nottingham, Earl of, 44, 46 
Noy, Attorney-General, 311 
Nun of Kent, 189 

O 

O'Niell's rebellion, 259-260 
Orleans, Siege of, 86, 87 
Ormond, 356, 358 
Osbaldistone, 310 
Overbury, Sir Thomas, 288 
Oxford, 334, 336 
Oxford, Earl of, loi, 105 
Oxford University, 64, 65, 1 7 1, 
172, 176 



Pale, the, 138 

Papacy, the, 62, 143, 148, 183, 

184 
Paris, 26, 29, 30, 32, 34, 80, 82, 

84,87 
Parliament, 2, 3, 21, 42-46, 47- 

56, 70, 93-96, 1 1 3- 1 14, 165, 

166, 170, 181 
Parsons, 225 



INDEX 



405 



Peasants' Revolt, 43 ; causes of, 

66-68 ; results of, 69-70 
Peter the Cruel, 37 
Peter's Pence, 187 
Petition of Right, 300, 301 
Petition of Thirty-one Articles, 94 
Philip the F'air, of France, 12 
Phillip IV. of France, 14 
Philip VI. of France, 12, 13, 14, 

16, 20, 22, 25, 26, 28 
Philip II. of Spain, 202, 205, 

206, 215, 216, 221, 225, 227, 

239, 240, 246 ff. , 290 
Philip III. of Spain, 290 
Philip, the Archduke, 142, 151 
Pilgrimage of Grace, the, 190 
Poor Law, the, 273, 274 
"Poor Priests," 65 
Poynings, Sir Edward, 141 
Poyning's Law, 141 
Prayer "Book, 201, 215, 232 
Presbyterians, the, 287, 315, 328, 

336 ff., 380 
"Pride's Purge," 339 
Protestation of the Commons, 295 
Prynne, 310 
Preble, 148 
Puritans, 264, 265, 286, 287, 319, 

346, 347, 382, 383 
Pym, John, 324, 330, 353 

R 

Raleigh, Sir Walter, 244, 252, 
276, 277, 286, 290, 321 

Reformation, the, 174-176, 183 ff., 
200-202, 207-211, 241, 242 

"Reformation" Parliament, 184- 

187 
Renaissance, 97, 172, 188 
Richard II.. 5, 42, 44, 45, 46, 

47, 48, 72, 73, 75, -ll, 80, 89, 

125, 126, 140 
Richard III., 106-112, 114, 124, 

127, 137 
Richard, Duke of York, 89, 90, 

92, 93 
Ridley, 201, 205 
Ridolfi's plot, 222 
Rizzio, 219 
Robert III. of Scotland, 75 



Robert of Artois, I T 
Rochelle, 38, 300, 303 
Rouen, 82 
Roussillon, 145, 146 
Royal Exchange, 270 
Rump, the, 34b, 361, 362, 374 
Rupert, Prince, 334-337 
Russian Company, 268 



St. Bartholomew, massacre of, 223 
St. John, 329 
Salic Law, 14 
Sanctuary, rights of, 137 
Schwarz, Martin, 129 
Scotland, 2, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15, 
29, 30, 45, 75, 77i 107, 132, 

133, 147, 158 
Selden, 309 

Self-denying Ordinance, 337 
Sexby, 366 
Seymour, Lord, 252 
Seymour, Lord, of Sudeley, 198 
Shakespeare, 242 
Ship Money, 311, 312 
"Short" Parliament, 315 
Sidney, Sir PhiUp, 244 
Sigismund, 82, 97, 142 
Simon, Richard, 128 
Sindercomb, 366 
Six Articles, 192 
Somerset, dukes of, 90, 92, 100 
Somerset (the Protector), 194, 196- 

200 
Spain, 17, 37, 143, 150, 151, 156, 

159, 160, 166 
Spenser, 244 

Staffords, the Rebellion of, 128 
Stanley, Lord, 108, iii 
Stanley, William, III 
Star Chamber, 136, 278, 310, 327 
Statutes — 

Apprentices, 271 

De Donis Condicionalibus, 60 

De Heretico Comburrendo, 97 

De Tallagio Non Concedendo, 
302 

Fines, 137 

Labourers', 68 

Mortmain, 60, 62 



4o6 



INDEX 



Statutes {continued) — 

Praemunire, 62, 165, 186 

Provisors, 62 

Quia Emptores, 60 

Uses, 190 
Strafford, Earl oi^see Wentworth) 
Stratford, Archbishop, 50 
Strode, 330 
Stuart, Esme, 225 
Surrey, Earl of, 158 



"Tables," the, 315 

Ten Articles, 190, 192 

Therouenne, 157 

Thirty-nine Articles, the, 234, 235 

Throgmorton's plot, 225, 226 

Tournay, 157 

Tours, 88 

Treaties — 

Bretigni, 15, 34-39, 80 

Cambray, 156 

l^dinburgh, 219 

Etaples, 132, 146 

Granada, 154 

Holy Alliance, 148 

Holy League, 156, 157 

Intercursus Magnus, 148, 178 

Intercursus Malus, 178 

Northampton, 8 

Pecquigny, 106, 1 16, 146 

Troyes, 84 
" Triers," 365 
Trinity College, 224 
Trinity Houses, 270 
Turkey Company, 268 
Tyler, Wat, 69 

U 
Ulster, plantation of, 313 



" Undertakers," 293 

" Unlearned " Parliament, 94 

Uses, 62 



V 



Valentine, 330 
Venables, 369 
Vigo, 255 
Villeins, 67-69, 98 
Vowel's plot, 366 



W 

Waldenses, 370 

Wales, 74, 77 

Walsingham, 227 

Warbeck, Perkin, 108, 130-135, 

141, 146, 147, 148 
Warham, Archbishop, 169 
Warwick, R. Nevill, Earl of, 124, 

125, 128, 129, 134 
Waterford, 132, 138 
Wentworth (Strafford), 304, 306- 

3o9> 313. 314, 324-327 
Westminster, 119 
Wexford, 358 
Wight, Isle of, 43 
William the Silent, 225 
Windsor, 73, 108 
Wolsey, 153, 154, 160, 162, 164, 

169, 170, 172, 175, 176, 183, 

184, 186 
"Wonderful" Parliament, 44, 46 
Woodvilles, 107, no, 144 
Wyatt's Rebellion, 204 
Wychlerley, 384 
Wy cliff, 42, 61, 62, 64-66, 174 
Wykeham, William of, 42 
Yorkists, 89, 99, no, 124 ff. 



Ji Selection from the 
Catalogue of 

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 

Complete Catalogxjtes sent 
on application 



The Story of the Nations. 



In the story form the current of each National life 

is distinctly indicated, and its picturesque and note- 
worthy periods and episodes are presented for the 
reader in their philosophical relation to each other 
as well as to universal history. 

It is the plan of the writers of the different volumes 
to enter into the real life of the peoples, and to bring 
them before the reader as they actually lived, labored, 
and struggled — as they studied and wrote, and as 
they amused themselves. In carrying out this plan, 
the myths, with which the history of all lands begins, 
will not be overlooked, though these will be carefully 
distinguished from the actual history, so far as the 
labors of the accepted historical authorities have 
resulted in definite conclusions. 

The subjects of the different volumes have been 
planned to cover connecting and, as far as possible, 
consecutive epochs or periods, so that the set when 
completed will present in a comprehensive narrative 
the chief events in the great Story of the Nations; 
but it is, of course, not always practicable to issue 
the several volumes in their chronological order. 

Nos. 1-61 , each $1.50 

Half leather 1.75 

Nos. 62 and following Nos., each (by mail, 1.50 

net 1.35 
tialf leather (by mail, $1.75) net 1.60 

For list of volumes see next page. 



THE STORY OF THE NATIONS 



GREECE. Prof. Jas. A. Harrison. 

ROME. Arthur Gilman. 

THE JEWS. Prof. James K. Hos- 
mer. 

CHALDEA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
GERMANY. S. Baring-Gould. 
NORWAY. Hjalmar H. Boyesen. 
SPAIN. Rev. E. E. and Susan 

Hale. 
HUNGARY. Prof. A. Vambery. 

CARTHAGE. Prof. Alfred J. 
Church. 

THE SARACENS. Arthur Gil- 
man. 

THE MOORS IN SPAIN. Stanley 
Lane-Poole. 

THE NORMANS. Sarah Ome 

Jewett. 
PERSIA. S. G. W. Benjamin. 

ANCIENT EGYPT. Prof. Geo. 
Rawlinson. 

ALEXANDER'S EMPIRE. Prof. 
J. P. Mahaflfy. 

ASSYRIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 

THE GOTHS. Henry Bradley. 

IRELAND. Hon. Emily Lawless. 

TURKEY. Stanley Lane-Poole. 

MEDIA, BABYLON, AND PER- 
SIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 

MEDIEVAL FRANCE. Prof. Gus- 
tave Masson. 

HOLLAND. Prof. J. Thorold 
Rogers. 

MEXICO. Susan Hale. 

PHOENICIA. George Rawlinson. 



THE HANSA TOWNS. Helen 

Zimmem. 

EARLY BRITAIN. Prof. Alfred 
J. Church. 

THE BARBARY CORSAIRS. 

Stanley Lane-Poole. 

RUSSIA. W. R. MorfiU. 

THE JEWS UNDER ROME. W. 
D. Morrison. 

SCOTLAND. John Mackintosh. 
SWITZERLAND. R. Stead and 
Mrs. A. Hug. 

PORTUGAL. H. Morse-Stephens. 

THE BYZANTINE EMPIRE) C. 
W. C. Oman. 

SICILY. E. A. Freeman 



THE TUSCAN 
Bella Duffy. 



REPUBLICS. 



POLAND. W. R. MorfiU. 
PARTHIA. Geo. Rawlinson. 
JAPAN. David Murray. 
THE CHRISTIAN RECOVERY 
OF SPAIN. H. E. Watts. 

AUSTRALASIA. Greville Tregar- 
then. 

SOUTHERN AFRICA. Geo. M. 

Theal. 
VENICE. Alethea Wiel. 

THE CRUSADES. T. S. Archer 
and C. L. Kingsford. 

VEDIC INDIA. Z. A. Ragozin. 
BOHEMIA. C. E. Maurice. 
CANADA. J. G. Bourinot. 
THE BALKAN STATES. WilUam 
Miller. 



THE STORY OF THE NATIONS 



BRITISH RULE IN INDIA. R. 
W. Frazer. 

MODERN FRANCE. Andre Le 
Bon. 

THE BRITISH EMPIRE. Alfred 
T. Story. Two vols. 

THE FRANKS. Lewis Sergeant. 

THE WEST INDIES. Amos K. 
Fiske. 

THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND, 
Justin McCarthy, M.P. Two 
vols. 

AUSTRIA. Sidney Whitman. 

CHINA. Robt. K. Douglass. 

MODERN SPAIN. Major Martm 
A. S. Hume. 

MODERN ITALY. Pietro Orsi. 

THE THIRTEEN COLONIES. 
Helen A. Smith. Two vols. 



WALES AND CORNWALL. Owne 

M. Edwards. Net $1.35. 

MEDIEVAL ROME. Wm. Miller. 

THE PAPAL MONARCHY. Wm. 
Barry. 

MEDIEVAL INDIA. Stanley 
Lane-Poole. 

BUDDHIST INDIA. T. W. Rhys- 
Davids. 

THE SOUTH AMERICAN RE- 
PUBLICS. Thomas C. Daw- 
son. Two vols. 

PARLIAMENTARY ENGLAND. 
Edward Jenks. 

MEDIEVAL ENGLAND. Mary 
Bateson. 

THE UNITED STATES. Edward. 

Earle Sparks. Two vols. 
ENGLAND. THE COMING OF 

PARLIAMENT. L. Cecil Jane. 




Heroes of the Nations. 



A Series of biographical studies of the lives and 
work of a number of representative historical char- 
acters about whom have gathered the great traditions 
of the Nations to which they belonged, and who have 
been accepted, in many instances, as types of the 
several National ideals. With the life of each 
typical character will be presented a picture of the 
National conditions surrounding him during his 
career. 

The narratives are the work of writers who are 
recognized authorities on their several subjects, and, 
while thoroughly trustworthy as history, will present 
picturesque and dramatic "stories" of the Men and 
of the events connected with them. 

To the Life of each " Hero" will be given one duo- 
decimo volume, handsomely printed in large type, 
provided with maps and adequately illustrated ac- 
cording to the special requirements of the several 
subjects. 

Nos. 1-32, each. ...... $1.50 

Half leather ; . 1. 1.75 

No. ^3 and followin.^ Nos., each 

/.'T' (by mail $1.50, net 1.35) 
Half leather (by^mail, $1.75) net i.6c 

For full l\^ of- volume.^ see next page. 



HEROES OF THE NATIONS 



NELSON. By W. Clark Russell. 

GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS. By C- 
R. L. Fletcher. 

PERICLES. By Evelyn Abbott. 

THEODORIC THE GOTH. By 
Thomas Hodgkin. 

SIR PHILIP SIDNEY. By H. R. 

Fox-Bourne. 

JULIUS C^SAR. By W. Warde 
Fowler. 

WYCLIF. By Lewis Sergeant. 

NAPOLEON. By W. O'Connor 

Morris. 
HENRY OF NAVARRE. By P. 

F. Willert. 

CICERO. By J. L. Strachan- 
Davidson. 

ABRAHAM LINCOLN. By Noah 
Brooks. 

PRINCE HENRY (OF PORTU- 
GAL) THE NAVIGATOR. 
By C. R. Beazley. 

JULIAN THE PHILOSOPHER. 
By Alice Gardner. 

LOUIS XIV. By Arthur Hassall. 

CHARLES XII. By R. Nisbet 
Bain. 

LORENZO DE' MEDICI. By Ed- 
ward Armstrong. 

JEANNE D'ARC. By Mrs. OU- 

phant. 
CHRISTOPHER COLUMBUS. By 

Washington Irving. 

ROBERT THE BRUCE. By Sir 

Herbert Maxwell. 
HANNIBAL. By Vf. O'Cot i -^r 

Morris. 



ULYSSES S. GRANT. By WilUam 
Conant Church. 

ROBERT E. LEE. By Henry 

Alexander White. 
THE CID CAMPEADOR. By H. 

Butler Clarke. 

SALADIN. By Stanley Lane- 
Poole. 

BISMARCK. By J. W. Head- 
lam. 

ALEXANDER THE GREAT. By 
Benjamin I. Wheeler. 

CHARLEMAGNE. By H. W. C. 
Davis. 

OLIVER CROMWELL. By 
Charles Firth. 

RICHELIEU. By James B. Per- 
kins. 

DANIEL O'CONNELL. By Rob- 
ert Dunlop. 

SAINT LOUIS (Louis IX. of 
France). By Frederick Perry. 

LORD CHATHAM. By Walford 

Davis Green. 
OWEN GLYNDWR. By Arthur 

G. Bradley. $1.35 net. 
HENRY V. By Charles L. Kings- 
ford. $1.35 net. 
EDWARD I. By Edward Jenks. 

• $1.35 net. 
ALGJSTUS C^SAR. By J. P 

1- rth. $1.35 net. 
FRLj F ICK THE GREAT. By 

"V. . F. Reddaway. 
WELLIN' rON. By W. O'Connor 

Morr 
CONSTAN >IE THE GREAT. By 

J. B. 



HEROES OF THE NATIONS 



Other volumes in preparation are 



MOLTKE. By Spencer Wilkinson. 
JUDAS MACCABEUS. By Israel 
Abrahams. 

SOBIESKI. By F. A. Pollard. 

ALFRED THE TRUTHTELLER. 

By Frederick Perry. 
FREDERICK II. By A. L. 

Smith. 
MARLBOROUGH. By C. W. C. 

Oman. 



RICHARD THE LION-HEARTED 
By T. A. Archer. 



WILLIAM THE SILENT. 
Ruth Putnam. 



CHARLES THE 

Ruth Putnam. 



BOLD. 



By 



By 



GREGORY VII. By F. Urquhart. 
MAHOMET. By D. S. Margoliouth. 



New York— G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS, Publishers— London 



.<r 



.V 



H 372 85 



»:* '*- 










£1°^ 




























!ri'.'>. .V-.'^Z;***! 









<• «^^ .'^ ♦ 








O *, ** .0 ^^ " • , , 







♦ ^ 





.^^ .^^^<^^•« ''^ --c^,^ ** 



